No products in the cart.


Will Norquist’s Immigration Stance Make Hillary’s Gun Tax a Reality?

ScreenHunter_07 Apr. 19 18.21
What does Grover think Hillary will do about guns and taxes once he helps her get the votes she needs through “amnesty” for untold millions?

“A $1,000 per gun tax should serve as a ‘role model’ for states, according to the governor of the U.S. territory of the Northern Mariana Islands, which imposed the $1,000 gun tax earlier this month,” Americans for Tax Reform notes. “An idea first endorsed by Hillary Clinton in 1993, steep gun taxes have now taken hold in Cook County, Ill. the city of Seattle, and now a U.S. territory.”

“In newly released footage from Americans for Tax Reform, Clinton is shown nodding enthusiastically as she endorsed the 25% gun tax and as legal gun dealers were described as ‘purveyors of violence,’” the ATR report explains.

[ot-video type=”youtube” url=””]

The footage isn’t exactly “new.” C-SPAN aired it in 1993, and the exchange was reported at the time by the Associated Press:

Sen. Bill Bradley, D-N.J., picked up Mrs. Clinton’s support for his idea of slapping stiff taxes on ”purveyors of violence:” a 25 percent sales tax on guns and $2,500 license fees for gun dealers.

”Speaking personally … I’m all for that,” said the first lady. But she stressed she was just speaking for herself.

”Well, let me say that there is no more important personal endorsement in the country today, and I thank you very much,” said a pleased-as-punch Bradley.

Curiously, it’s not even “new” for ATR. The group posted a copy of the video on YouTube and filed a media report last September, and milked it for attention again in February. Perhaps what they meant to say is they’ve located a better copy of the exchange?

Not that making sure more people become aware of it isn’t valid. It is. But what can’t be overlooked is that immigration policies championed by Americans for Tax Reform’s president Grover Norquist can make new gun taxes a reality within a decade or two, and forget Hillary’s measly 25%.  He’s enabling the potential to go full Mariana.

That’s because Norquist is, per MSNBC, “an amnesty-loving immigration activist,” and one who “keeps standing” with Michael Bloomberg’s “Partnership for a New American Economy” amnesty lobby. All credible measurements show that will result in millions of new anti-gun Democrat voters, establishing unchallengeable majorities in the legislatures, a resultant stacking of the courts through confirmations of anti-gun activist judges, and a reversal of all legislative and judicial gains enjoyed in recent years.

The irony is, while helping enable the ultimate enactment of the very gun taxes he’s now decrying, Norquist gets to once more posture himself as a champion of gun rights and tax reforms. Significantly, this is happening at a time when a handful of informed gun rights advocates are pitting themselves against the NRA establishment to boot him from the board.


Also see: Nugent Undermines His Immigration Protests by Endorsing Norquist



David Codrea blogs at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance (, and is a field editor/columnist for GUNS Magazine. Named “Journalist of the Year” in 2011 by the Second Amendment Foundation for his groundbreaking work on the “Fast and Furious” ATF “gunwalking” scandal, he is a frequent event speaker and guest on national radio and television programs.



  1. This tax plan seems to fly in the face of U.S. Supreme Court 319 U.S. 105 (1943) MURDOCK v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, in which the court declared that government could not tax the enjoyment of a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Granted, Murdock was not a 2nd amendment case, however a right is a right.

    1. Hint: The point of the article is that that won’t matter when al Nor’Qu’ist’s immigration policies give the Democrats permanent supermajority control of all branches of the federal government and of a supermajority of the states.

  2. It really doesn’t matter about the “gun tax” then or now. Instead of treating it as if it is something valid, why not call it what it is, TREASON against the American people.

    Think I am wrong, ask Dr. Vieira or read his books, and he is extremely well educated concerning the US Constitution, etc.

    “… immigration policies…”

    First America is NOT having a problem with immigration, she is having a problem with INVASIONS. Think not, READ the US Constitution, and add to that the laws we concerning immigration – and it is critical to understand that NO US president can make laws or chance laws lawfully, even if those domestic enemies at best, traitors more likely who serve within the legislative branch “gave that person or position “Fast Track”. It is NOT theirs to give, and if you believe that they can just lawfully ignore the contract they are under, plus the supreme law of our land them you need to rethink where you stand.

    Because IF you are standing up for, supporting and defending the US Constitution then it is a crime, multiple crimes that many of those who serve within our governments are committing up to and including TREASON and *Terrorism against the American people. They were NOT delegated any type of authority at all over Americans owning arms. Matter of fact, the Bill of Rights Preamble makes it VERY clear that those are things that are FORBIDDEN to those in government to take any type of action, EXCEPT and ONLY in the few instances where it is in writing as to when and how, what type of actions may be taken.

    Get out of the fake world they created to destroy us, and start enforcing the US Constitution, writing about the crimes they commit when you get an article like this – break down the actual crimes they committed creating it, what those crimes are that who enforce it will be committing, etc; what WE the People as the Militia are supposed to be doing to correct those crimes under our US Constitution, our legitimate government.

    *28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.

    Thomas Jefferson: “When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”

    President Andrew Johnson: “Outside of the Constitution we have no legal authority more than private citizens, and within it we have only so much as that instrument gives us. This broad principle limits all our functions and applies to all subjects.”

    George Washington: “A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.”

    Those that serve within our governments have requirements to USE ONLY the Militia for specific actions they may need to take – and that is in writing. Those that serve within our governments have duties to the people of this nation and to the Militias.

    The Militias have duties to the US Constitution, the enforcement of, etc.

    George Washington, “Sentiments on a Peace Establishment”, letter to Alexander Hamilton; “The Writings of George Washington”: “It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government…, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”

    Richard Henry Lee, First Senate: “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”

    George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment: “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

    WE hold THEM in check and accountable for their actions when serving and THAT IS in writing within the US Constitution and still is in most state Constitutions.

    Remember it is those who serve within our governments that are FORBIDDEN to have anything at all to do with what is called “Natural” rights – they are PROTECTED FROM those who serve within our governments, and it is the Militias that directly enforce that accountability.

    Thomas Cooley: “The right is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the law, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon… If the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for that purpose”.

    Patrick Henry: “If you have given up your militia, and Congress shall refuse to arm them, you have lost every thing. Your existence will be precarious, because you depend on others, whose interests are not affected by your infelicity.”

    William Rawle, whose work was adopted as a constitutional law textbook at West Point and other institutions, and was United States Attorney for Pennsylvania, describes the scope of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms: “The prohibition is general. No clause in the constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”

    Tench Coxe: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American…The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”

    Justice Story, Associate Justice, Supreme Court wrote: “The next amendment is: “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.
    “The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them”.

    U.S. Supreme Court CAHA v. U.S., 152 U.S. 211: “Generally speaking, within any state of this Union the preservation of the peace and the protection of person and property are the functions of the state government, and are NO PART of the primary duty, at least, of the nation. The laws of congress in respect to those matters DO NOT extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force ONLY in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government.” (caps mine)

    -> John Adams, from A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law (1765): “Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right… and a desire to know; BUT BESIDES THIS, THEY HAVE A RIGHT, AND INDISPUTABLE, UNALIENABLE, INDEFEASIBLE, DIVINE RIGHT TO THAT MOST DREADED AND ENVIED KIND OF KNOWLEDGE, I MEAN OF THE CHARACTERS AND CONDUCT OF THEIR RULERS.” (this says that WE have the right to know exactly what those who serve in OUR government does, and THOSE that serve have NO lawful “right” to keep ANY of their actions hidden from us.)

    Let’s go to how they felt about immigration, okay? Understand that they did not want everything put into every language, ENGLISH is the language of our nation, the US Constitution and each state Constitution are all in English and THEY, NOT the people who serve within them, are our governments..

    George Washington, “Farewell Address”, September 17, 1796: “For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of AMERICAN, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principle. You have, in a common cause, fought, and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess, are the work of joint councils, and joint efforts — of common dangers, sufferings and success.”

    James Madison: “It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours. But why is this desirable?”
    “Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of.”

    George Washington emphasized that immigrants should be absorbed into American life so that “by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word soon become one people.”

    Alexander Hamilton: “The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.”
    Hamilton further warned that “The United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass; by promoting in different classes different predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and antipathies against others, it has served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils. It has been often likely to compromise the interests of our own country in favor of another.”

    He predicted, correctly, that “The permanent effect of such a policy will be, that in times of great public danger there will be always a numerous body of men, of whom there may be just grounds of distrust; the suspicion alone will weaken the strength of the nation, but their force may be actually employed in assisting an invader.”

    The survival of the American republic, Hamilton maintained, depends upon “the preservation of a national spirit and a national character.” He asserted, “To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens the moment they put foot in our country would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty.”

    1. America DOES have a problem with invasion AND excessive *LEGAL* immigration.

      Madison’s statement was made over 200 years ago when the population was a sparse few million. Not only does it no longer make sense now, it no longer made sense a century ago in the 1920s when Coolidge and every subsequent president through Eisenhower slashed legal immigration to a pleasant, assimilable, beneficial trickle.

      Today’s LEGAL immigrants lean overwhelmingly Democrat and anti-gun, not to mention even darker tendencies.

      We’re already at ~275 million legal American citizens. We no longer need to squeeze in millions of warm bodies.

      Sadly, the frontier is gone. Thanks to excessive immigration, we’re going higher and higher density, paving, “developing”, urbanizing and squeezing everything. Wrecking and redistributing our real wealth and income, jacking up our cost of living, cost of land, cost of space, cost of privacy and dignity, destroying our qualify of life, liberty, security, freedom of movement, culture, and both the human and natural environments.

      When will the mass legal immigration promoters be happy? When our population reaches a billion? 2 billion? 3? When we’re living like rodents running a rat race in a neo-Darwinian-Malthusian third-world banana-republic sardine can?

      1. P.S. I agree with Madison’s desire for non-suicidal criteria, but for the last century we have needed non-suicidal numerical limits as well. We need to reduce it to a trickle, however sane the criteria for admittance. And abolish automatic citizenship for the children of non-citizens.

      2. We, through OUR representatives – when these domestic enemies and Traitors to the USA are replaced – are supposed to let in people who can more easily adapt our values because they understand them. Most entering our nation since Bush 1 – who opened the doors for this different type of immigration – understand only force and corruption. Some do not even have the word in their language for a lot of our values. They do not even understand freedom as we do/did.

        This was deliberate, as was the movement under the pretense of assisting those “immigrating” here to everything being put into their languages, their values being “honored” and allowed here – all in the name of destroying America from within. We have been/are being hit in every way possible to destroy us. Some of us fought all that, but were called stupid, racist, insensitive, etc.

        It is a war created by traitors who could have stood for the nation they OWE much to.

        Do NOT blame the immigrants who are here legally and lawfully, teach them about our values, because when they actually can understand it, what the crime is, what America is about, they take on those values as their own – or so far that is how I have found it. The rest must leave, whatever age they are as we did NOT invite, force them to come here – and the people who act as if they actually have the delegated authority to do so do NOT have that authority.

        WE the people are not held to any commitments they made in our name because the delegated authority came with strings attached that HAD to be met for any actions they commit to represent OUR WILL – and any person, nation, bank, corporation should know that as they KNOW we are a constitutional republic with the delegated authority that is ALLOWED to be used in our name and backed by us IS IN WRITING. That is the contract they agreed to to be able to occupy the position they are in, and if they did NOT agree to it, they NEVER had any authority, and it is open to all to read so to known what was done criminally and what was done with any backing of the American people.

        I am not talking about those who came in the last 15 years or so, that was when since we did not stop the other going on those who work from inside to destroy us OPEN LY upped the stakes and let mostly the most degenerate type of people into our nation, with “values” so far from our own it is disgusting. This to, is war on America, Americans – just people do not recognize the weapons being used, even paid to be here, so that their “values” can be encouraged in the name of “diversity”, but in reality in the name of the destruction of America.

        Diversity does NOT mean we have a bunch of little foreign nations within our own nation tearing us apart from the inside. Here in America, it means that no matter what race you are, you are an American with American values and ethics. That is not what we have today.

      3. “Do NOT blame the immigrants who are here legally and lawfully, teach them about our values…”

        Who’s blaming the immigrants? The problem is the *policy* of mass legal *immigration* that is excessive by an order of magnitude over what is beneficial and assimilable. I blame those who support mass immigration, not the immigrants.

        Even otherwise beneficial immigrants are a problem in excessive numbers. Even if you imported a billion well vetted Christian conservatives, they would still be a billion people. You would still be quadrupling the population and density of the USA. No matter how decent, conservative, and law abiding they are, the presence of that many people would still be crush and redistribute our qualify of life, liberty, freedom, security, privacy, dignity, real wages and wealth, and human and natural environments, while driving up the cost of living, cost of land, cost of real estate, cost of space.

        You say, “teach them about our values”. Are you volunteering for that job, or just volunteering everyone else? Do recommend we have another government program to do that? More government indoctrination?

        When legal immigration is a beneficial trickle, immigrants are naturally assimilated and learn about our values and culture, without any government programs. When immigration is excessive, that becomes impossible, with the tragic results we’ve been experiencing. This is one of the reasons Coolidge and subsequent presidents through Eisenhower cut way back on immigration.

  3. Government Tyranny. Pick up your guns and march to Washington and let them know who the real boss is, it is “We The People”. That seems to be the only thing they will understand.

  4. Hillary Clinton is a typical Kazarian treasonous mouth piece for her bank$ter benefactors whose agenda is to disarm the Republic to promote the NWO and compel total peonage.

    She and her treasonous kind>>> ARE THE PROBLEM… and Never will be even a tiny bit of the solution…

  5. History continues to repeat itself, we as a nation seem to be confused where individuals rank. Sheep, wolves or sheepdogs.

    Allowing groups or an individual to override and crush our God given rights and freedoms is not to be “wait as see if someone is strong or courageous enough “. We then become pawns to be controlled by those emboldened by lack of protest by the people.

    Our forefathers had the very same problems and threats; government control and taxes. Putting themselves and everything they own on the line for what they belived in. Times change, people do not!

    Stand up now for yours, your family’s and our nation’s God given rights and freedoms. Speak out, don’t be afraid to demand what has been purchased with the blood sweat and tears of those who fought and died for us and our nation. Don’t let them down by not following their sacrifice for us.

    Real freedom “We the People”

    God Bless America

  6. The left will stop at nothing to take our guns, and if they succeed you will see a war of all wars.

  7. Calling out for the cohort of New Founders of the caliber of the originals to guide the freedom fighters needed to oust the tyrants usurping the Founder’s creation.

    Many folks I converse with on-line and in real life agree that there are very serious problems within the USA and many of those folks are convinced that no meaningful change can occur via the embedded systems that are supposed to allow We, the People to influence government.

    I ponder the need for Revolutionary War Two or a military coup or, maybe a secession with America’s warrior class wrenching away a portion of the old, failing USA and creating a New USA.

Comments are closed.