Red Alert! DOJ Memo: "Outlaw And Confiscate All Guns"

[libertygrl]

The National Rifle Association has obtained a Department of Justice memo calling for national gun registration and confiscation. The nine page “cursory summary” on current gun control initiatives was not officially released by the Obama administration.

The DOJ memo (downloadable here as a PDF: http://static.infowars.com/2013/02/i/general/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf) states the administration “believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation,” according to the NRA, and thinks universal background checks “won’t work without requiring national gun registration.” Obama has yet to publicly support national registration or firearms confiscation, although the memo reveals his administration is moving in that direction.

The memo stands in stark contrast to the administration’s public stance on so-called gun control. White House spokesman Jay Carney said last month that laws proposed by Obama would not “take away a gun from a single law-abiding American.”

The NRA declined to explain how it obtained the document. The memo was written by the acting director of the Justice Department’s National Institute of Justice, Greg Ridgeway. It is dated January 4, two weeks before Obama mounted his attack on the Second Amendment following the Sandy Hook massacre. Ridgeway came to the Justice Department from the RAND corporation.

The memo says universal background checks on firearms purchases may help the government push to control and eventually outlaw firearms, but it would lead to an increase in illegally purchased guns.

It pointed out that banning high capacity ammunition clips would be ineffective due to the fact there is a large number of them already in circulation.

A Justice Department official said the memo is an unfinished review of gun violence research and does not represent administration policy.

The DOJ memo arrived a few weeks prior to a letter sent out by the Department of Veterans Affairs. “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition,” the sent to military veterans states. “If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”

“US veterans are receiving letters from the government informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both,” the Gateway Pundit remarked.
NRA’s Chris Cox talks about the DOJ memo:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHmxY7zE5uc&feature=player_embedded

California Democrat senator Dianne Feinstein reveals the government agenda — confiscation:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_LaBJvI0BI&feature=player_embedded

h ttp://www.infowars.com/doj-memo-outlaw-and-confiscate-all-guns/

[The Northbreather]

Here we go

[The Northbreather]

“US veterans are receiving letters from the government informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both,” the Gateway Pundit remarked.


WOW

[Anti Federalist]

From the .pdf file.


Ammunition logs:

Goal: 1) Reduce flow of ammunition to the illicit market and 2) develop leads for illegal weapons.

Note that closely.

They will be scouring the records of ammo purchases, looking for prohibited persons, once these are adopted more widespread.

[libertygrl]

The memo was from this guy:


Statistician Greg Ridgeway: New Deputy Director of National Institute of Justice
1 OCTOBER 2012

Amstat News invited new National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Deputy Director Greg Ridgeway to respond to the following questions about his role in this position. Ridgeway, an ASA member, also speaks to what he, as a statistician, brings to NIJ’s strategy to strengthen its science mission.

Greg Ridgeway earned his PhD in statistics from the University of Washington and his BS in statistics from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Before joining the National Institute of Justice, Ridgeway was a statistician at the RAND Corporation and directed RAND’s criminal justice research program. He specializes in the analysis of criminal justice issues, most prominently policing, gun violence prevention, and drug policy.

How did you get involved in criminal justice research?

I started at the RAND Corporation pretty much fresh out of graduate school. I found that many statisticians were already doing good work in public policy areas such as health, education, and national security. However, I found a near vacuum in criminal justice research and a lot of opportunities for statistical work. Early on, I thought my analyses of gun violence in East Los Angeles and racial profiling were having an impact. And that led to new opportunities and more criminal justice research questions. The justice system continues to be a topic with a lot of room for more statisticians.

What about this position appealed to you?

There were three primary reasons I took the job. First, NIJ is the lead federal agency for criminal justice research. It has a lot of influence on which direction the field goes. The idea of having a prominent role in that process was very appealing to me. Second, I think the criminal justice system is a fascinating world in which to conduct research and, while I could have continued my research at RAND, I saw moving to NIJ as an opportunity to be exposed to new people and new ideas. Even my RAND colleagues said that spending some time in government is essential to really understand public policy. Already, I have learned a lot. Last, both current and former NIJ staff who I talked to thought I had a lot to contribute to NIJ. It is always nice to feel needed.

The 2010 National Academies (NAS) Report, “Strengthening the National Institute of Justice,” made many recommendations to strengthen the science mission and research infrastructure of NIJ, noting resource, autonomy, and authority challenges. Did that report’s findings play into your decision to accept the position?

The NAS report was released just before John Laub, NIJ’s current director joined and provided a good starting place for him to examine and map out NIJ’s future. The creation of my position was part of his strategy to strengthen NIJ’s science mission, a way of securing a senior scientific leader. I had been an NIJ grantee for many years and thought I knew NIJ quite well. However, the NAS report showed the complicated environment in which NIJ and its staff work. Besides the resource constraints, which will always exist, NIJ is unique among federal science agencies in that it also has a mission to serve the practitioner community. That was very much the kind of organization I wanted to join.

Why do you think they hired a statistician? What about your background and experience appealed to NIJ?

I’m sure they did not set out to find a statistician. That is just an added bonus! For me, being a statistician was a pathway. At RAND, I worked on dozens of projects on gangs, guns, drugs, policing, but data analysis was the theme across all of these. While some of these analyses were ending up in statistical journals, I was also testifying at city council meetings about my findings; advising major city police chiefs; and exchanging ideas with judges, attorneys, and advocates. In addition, for the last five years, I directed RAND’s criminal justice research program and gained a lot of experience in managing personnel, budgets, and strategies in a research organization. I think the combination of my academic research and practical and management experience made me a good fit for the job.

What is your role as deputy director?

I am responsible for NIJ’s scientific offices covering social science, technology and physical sciences, and forensic science. I work closely with the office directors and their staffs on issues big and small. The most challenging questions are about how NIJ can affect and improve our nation’s criminal justice system. What issues need greater attention? What kinds of projects should we invest in? Which projects show the greatest promise? Where do we need to take more risks? Along the way toward answering these questions, we need to constantly tune into the input of practitioners, cultivate the next generation of criminal justice scholars, maintain a fair and transparent review process, and be good stewards of public dollars.

Describe some of your specific goals and challenges as you begin your tenure.

NIJ’s greatest strategic asset is its ability to make investments in ideas. Therefore, almost all of our challenges revolve around how to get the best return on those investments. We need to have a good process for synthesizing the key concerns that practitioners face in police, courts, and corrections so we’re investing in the right ideas. We need to make sure our review process is fair, transparent, and efficient. We need to take some risks on ideas that might take a decade to mature. And last, we need to make sure the results of our investments are having an impact on the field. There are several examples of NIJ successes in each of these steps, and I will be working toward improvements in each.

Other than you and the statisticians at the Bureau of Justice Statistics, we’re not aware of many other statisticians within the DOJ science-related units. Does your hiring signal an increasing appreciation for statisticians across the DOJ?

I have never had the sense that there is a lack of appreciation for statisticians, but rather that there are few statisticians thinking about justice issues. Admittedly, numerous fields such as health care and pharmaceuticals, finance, and environmental sciences compete to attract statisticians. I would like to attract more statisticians to justice system research. Forensic science, for example, is a key area in which there is much room for new statistical analysis and research. The NAS report recommended that NIJ “nurture and grow the pool of researchers involved in criminal justice research.” I will make sure the statistical community is part of that pool.

h ttp://magazine.amstat.org/blog/2012/10/01/nij-ridgeway/

[tangent4ronpaul]

WOW!

+rep

download the pdf...

-t

[libertygrl]

Ridgeway's previous employment was with the RAND CORPORATION. Still looking up info about NIJ:

Uploaded on Sep 28, 2010

Alex talks with Emmy-nominated TV reporter and screenwriter Alex Abella, author author of Soldiers of Reason: The Rand Corporation and the American Empire, a study of the world's most influential think tank.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4RoCOTQT5Y&feature=player_embedded

[tangent4ronpaul]

It has since been held
up in court due primarily to the use of the phrase “handgun ammunition,” which is not a well-defined
phrase.

awww - n/ you wondered why atrocious legislation is so often full of ambiguous, undefined terms...

-t

[DamianTV]

How do you destabilize the United States?

Launching an outright physical attack on the country itself would not be effective. People would easily realize the obviousness of who is causing the destabilization. However, depriving the law abiding citizens of their ability to bear arms will leave nearly every single criminal with easy access to guns, and the law abiding citizens without the ability to defend themselves. The people will destabilize their own country.

The latter scenario is much more effective because most people will blame criminals for the destabilization of their city or town and not those that created the real problem to begin with. The people will cry out for solutions from the very same group that created the problem to begin with, and eventually, these mundane people will finally demand their govt to make all guns illegal. Thus, destabilizing the US is a goal because the people will most likely respond by calling for a new Prohibition: The Prohibition of All Guns. Then they will be Hopelessly Dependant on those that created the problems, and much more Obedient.

This is no different than the way banks work. The banks create an artificial problem that they already have a solution for. These solutions benefit those at the top at the expense of those at the bottom. When these problem / solution scenarios are put in place, those at the top appear to be heroes, not the ones that caused the problems, the real enemies. Banks create artificial boom and bust economic cycles. Every time they do, more power is given to the banks in the hope that these same banks will somehow be able to fix the very problem they created. Banks goals have nothing to do with acquiring money. Their goals are all about being able to control of the issue of money (read: fiat currency).

We do have quite a few problems resulting from the way that guns are used today. However, the finalized solution of outlawing all guns is not going to help. In fact, just the opposite. It is going to make things much much worse. The REAL solution is to force Govts to realize that they have zero authority to deprive the people of their Natural and Constitutionally Enumerated Right to Bear Arms. Then, and only then, will they show the slightest modicum of respect for the concent of the governed.

[tangent4ronpaul]

"Note: Percentages do not add up to 100% since some sources fall into multiple
categories (e.g. unregulated seller at a flea market)"
unregulated seller - 20
flea market - 13
straw purchase - 47

Wouldn't all unregulated sellers and most flee market sales all fall into "straw purchaser"?
They are pushing it like it's a totally separate category and the base for their argument for universal background checks.

:rolleyes:

also noticed another study where they studied gun violence in the worst gang infested cities in the country.
Yeah - that's going to give real impartial results... :rolleyes:

-t

[KingNothing]

That was an interesting read, though it is more of a statement of fact than secret, agenda-outlining, NWO, memo.

Lot's of good sources were provided, and I found these particularly noteworthy given how obvious they are:

"A Los Angeles program to target straw purchasers sent new gun buyers a letter, signed by prominent
law enforcement officials, indicating that law enforcement had a record of their gun purchase and that
the gun buyer should properly record future transfers of the gun. The letters arrived during buyers’ 10-
day waiting periods, before they could legally return to the store to collect their new gun. An NIJ-funded
study found that the letter could modify gun owner behaviors. The study found that the rate at which
guns are reported stolen for those who received the letter is more than twice the rate for those who did
not receive the letter. While this does not show an effect on crime, it does show that a simple letter to
those at risk of diverting guns to the illicit market can modify their behavior"

and

"Assault weapons are not a major contributor to gun crime."

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, no kidding.

"Gun control does not deter crime, but we realize why the USG wants to disarm the citizens, so here is an outline of how to do it effectively."


That was an interesting read, though it is more of a statement of fact than secret, agenda-outlining, NWO, memo.

Lot's of good sources were provided, and I found these particularly noteworthy given how obvious they are:

"A Los Angeles program to target straw purchasers sent new gun buyers a letter, signed by prominent
law enforcement officials, indicating that law enforcement had a record of their gun purchase and that
the gun buyer should properly record future transfers of the gun. The letters arrived during buyers’ 10-
day waiting periods, before they could legally return to the store to collect their new gun. An NIJ-funded
study found that the letter could modify gun owner behaviors. The study found that the rate at which
guns are reported stolen for those who received the letter is more than twice the rate for those who did
not receive the letter. While this does not show an effect on crime, it does show that a simple letter to
those at risk of diverting guns to the illicit market can modify their behavior"

and

"Assault weapons are not a major contributor to gun crime."