Join the NRA Here and Save!

2023-24 NM Hunting Rules

Project Childsafe from the NSSF


“Can I touch the gun?”
“Can I play with a gun if it looks like a toy?”
“What do I do if I see a gun at my friend’s house?”

Even if kids aren’t asking about gun safety, that doesn’t mean they don’t have questions.

Project ChildSafe has teamed up with Julie Golob, a veteran, competitive shooting sports champion, hunter and mom, to discuss the importance of gun safety education. She’s joined by a group of kids whose thoughts about firearms will help inform parents about the best way to start a conversation. The result is an exclusive video — the first of its kind — to remind gun owners about the importance of having this conversation with their families.

Join us in a discussion about what to say, how to say it and the key elements to think about when speaking to your family about firearm safety.

Visit Project ChildSafe:

Ballistics – Principles Of Physics Involved In Design And Functioning Of Weapons And Ammunition, With Particular Reference To Their Artillery Application.

NRA Exec. V.P.: About a President who hates 2nd amendment

People have been telling us for years that the 2nd amendment was written in a time of Muskets, and that it doesn’t apply to the evolved weapons of today. Is it true?

The Good Guys

NRA: The Untold Story of Gun Confiscation After Katrina
The video you will see on this web site is horrifying. The crimes committed against law-abiding gun owners are beyond comprehension. The arrogance of anti-gun politicians and government officials and their hate of freedom will churn your stomach.

The law is the law, the Constitution is the Constitution. If ONE local mayor or police chief can decide what the Second Amendment means, it opens the door to tyranny—where ANY mayor or police chief can say what the Second Amendment means.

You’ve seen this brand of abuse of freedom in the history books—in the pages about days of gun confiscations leading to the terror of Stalin, Mao and Hitler. But you’d never in a million years think it could happen in America.
Well, it can and it did. And it will happen again unless we take action today.

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, Police Superintendent P. Eddie Compass unleashed a wave of confiscations with these chilling words:
“No one will be able to be armed. We will take all weapons. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns.”

Thousands of firearms were then confiscated from law-abiding gun owners. The police gave no paperwork or receipts for those guns. They just stormed in and seized them.

With your help we’re going to make the first time in New Orleans the LAST time in America. Thank you!

Now, one year later, these crimes against gun owners have snowballed into a far greater threat to our freedoms.
Even though NRA secured a court order demanding their immediate and unconditional return, almost every single confiscated firearm remains locked in government trailers.

With the stroke of a pen, Mayor Nagin and Police Superintendent Compass are getting away with “murder”—a savaging of the second, fourth and fourteenth amendments of our Constitution. And they have put America on notice that they’re going to keep seizing lawfully owned guns under any pretense.

New Orleans gun owners are showing up at these trailers, with serial numbers of their firearms, expecting Mayor Nagin and his band of anti-gunners to respect the Federal courts.
They are met by stony-eyed bureaucrats who say serial numbers aren’t enough—and that gun owners now need PROOF OF PURCHASE of these firearms.
How many of those gun owners do you think had original receipts for those firearms? And even if they did, how many do you think could find those receipts in the wreckage of a hurricane?
Many of these firearms were passed down from father to son, generation to generation. Some are precious heirlooms. Some are collector’s pieces won in our wars. And they were all lawfully owned and they must be returned to their owners.
With your help we’re going to make the first time in New Orleans the LAST time in America. Thank you!

FIREARMS FUTURE | Chapter 1: Borderless
It’s a deadly turf war: rival Mexican drug cartels battling for control of smuggling routes, power and money. The violence is not just coming here, it is here. Government’s first job is to secure the border … and Barack Obama has failed. Now he’s using that failure as an excuse to force more gun control laws on the lawful Arizonans, New Mexicans and Texans his policies abandoned.

NRA Life of Duty – Patriot Profiles: Patriot Guard Riders
NRA Life of Duty presented by Brownells – Patriot Profiles sponsored by Smith & Wesson
The Patriot Guard Riders consist of motorcycle riders from across the nation who come together and work to ensure that the funerals for America’s fallen heroes are shielded from interruptions by protesters. This group is one of several Patriot Profiles spotlighted on NRALifeofDuty.TV, a network that serves and supports those who go to work each day to protect, defend and fight for the safety of the American people. In light of the Supreme Court 8-1 decision that members of the renegade Westboro Baptist Church have a constitutionally protected right to protest military funerals, please take a moment to watch this video in honor of our heroes, those warriors like Brennan Gibson and Matthew Snyder.

Joe Biden’s Advice on Women’s Self Defense
During a Facebook chat on Tuesday, February 19, Vice President Joe Biden said that he advised his wife, Jill, to fire a shotgun twice in the air on an outside porch if she was ever concerned for her safety.

NRANews follows up the Gun Ban in the United Kingdom

Ask Obama’s Experts
Even Obama’s experts say his gun control policies won’t work. According to an internal Department of Justice memorandum, a gun ban, like the one being debated right now in Congress, will not work without a mandatory gun buyback, and “universal” background checks will not work without requiring gun registration. Call Congress at 202-224-3121 and tell them to reject President Obama’s gun control agenda — and to get serious about prosecuting criminals and fixing our broken mental health system.

NRA: To See Where Gun Licensing Leads, Look To Great Britain
England’s increasingly repressive firearms laws often are praised by those who would restrict the American right to arms, so it is important to realize that those firearms laws, which now prohibit the private possession of handguns, rest heavily on one foundation–the British gun owner licensing system. The right to keep and bear arms had been alive in England for eight centuries when Parliament enacted the Pistols Act of 1903. The Act, which prohibited the sale of pistols to minors and felons, also dictated that pistols could be sold only to those who possessed a gun license. Since the license could be obtained at a post office with only the payment of a fee, and since no license was required to keep a pistol solely in the home, there was no opposition. But within a few short years, the licensing system had moved from the post office to the police station. Suddenly, Britons who wanted to own handguns–or rifles–had to prove they had “good reason” for receiving a police permit. Shotguns were considered “sporting” and were exempted from licensing requirements until 1967.

Anti-gun lobbyists in the United States have called for a “needs-based licensing” system and some politicians have lined up to do their bidding.

Is licensing gun owners a good idea? After all, “we license people to drive cars don’t we?” If requiring gun owners to obtain a government license seems like a harmless idea to you, you may want to know about “Firearms Form 101.” That’s the “Application For A Firearms Certificate” that must be filled out by Britons in order to purchase a rifle or muzzleloading handgun. A separate form is required for a “shotgun certificate.”

Section 27 of the Firearms Act of 1968 (as amended by the 1997 Act) requires a chief officer of the Police Firearms Licensing Department to be satisfied that the applicant is “fit to be entrusted with a firearm.” (Emphasis added) As the applicant, you must provide: * Your home address for the last three years. * Your occupation and business address. * Information about previous convictions, including traffic violations. * Information about any history of Epilepsy. * Information about past treatment for drug use, depression or nervous disorders. * The name of your doctor, and permission for the police to search your medical records to obtain “factual details” about your medical history. * A list of the firearms you already own, including caliber, type, maker’s name and serial number. * A list of the ammunition you already own, including caliber and quantity. * A list of the firearms you wish to purchase, stating the reason for wanting to purchase them and where you plan on shooting or hunting with them. * A list of the maximum amount of ammunition you wish to possess at any one time, by caliber. * A list of the maximum amount of ammunition you plan to purchase at any one time, by caliber. * An address where the guns will be stored, for possible future inspection. * Information about whether you have previously held a firearms certificate, or a shotgun certificate. * A letter signed by the secretary of your shooting club or each landowner where you plan to hunt attesting to the fact that you have permission to shoot at those locations. * Four passport size photos of yourself. * A fee of L56 (approximately $90).

As an applicant, you must also designate two “referees” who will fill out a reference form regarding your character. This form will never be shown to you even though it weighs heavily in the final decision to approve or deny the application. The “referees” must: * Have known you for at least the last two years. * Not be a member of your family, a firearms dealer, a police officer or a police employee. * Be of “good character.” * Sign the application form declaring that it has been answered truthfully. * Sign and date the back of one of your passport photos attesting that it is an accurate representation of you at that time. * Explain in what capacity they have known you. * Indicate if they are members of a shooting club, and if so their license number and role in the club. * Provide their “opinion as to the applicant’s suitability to possess firearms.” * Provide information on your personal history, including any history of emotional problems, mental or physical disabilities and explain how knowledge of the information was gained. * Explain any difficulties you have with members of your family which “may give cause for concern given that a firearm or ammunition may be available in the household.” * Explain their knowledge of your experience with firearms. * Explain their knowledge of your attitude toward firearms. * Be subjected to a background check and allow personal information to be held on a police computer.

NRA News Special Report From Ginny Simone | “The Wrong House: Career Criminal Meets His Fate”
“He couldn’t have picked a worse neighborhood or a worse house.” When career criminal Kevin Wayne Chapman targeted the residence of West Taylor for a home invasion, he chose the wrong house. Ginny’s report includes an exclusive interview with would-be victim West Taylor.

Chuck Norris: An Outlaw’s Worst Nightmare?
On November 4, Vote Freedom First. To see how candidates in your area measure up on issues of concern to gun owners and sportsmen, please visit

The Truth About the Right to Carry
Only two states—Wisconsin and Illinois—prohibit carrying firearms for protection

• Nebraska is the most recent RTC state. In 2006, Nebraska’s RTC law was signed by Gov. Dave Heineman (R), Kansas’ Senate and House overrode Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ (D) veto of an RTC bill by votes of 30-10 and 91-33, respectively, and the Ohio Senate and House overrode then-Gov. Bob Taft’s (R) veto of a bill that improves the state’s 2004 RTC law, by votes of 21-12 and 71-21, respectively.

• Other recent RTC initiatives. In January 2006, Wisconsin’s Senate voted 23-10 to override Gov. Jim Doyle’s (D) veto of RTC; the Assembly fell two votes short, voting 64-34. In Jan. 2004, Ohio then-Gov. Bob Taft (R) signed RTC into law and New Mexico’s Supreme Court upheld a 2003 RTC law. Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri adopted RTC in 2003, the latter by overriding Gov. Bob Holden’s (D) veto.

• Types of RTC laws. There are 40 RTC states: 36 have “shall issue” laws, which require that carry permits be issued to applicants who meet uniform standards established by the state legislature. Alabama, Connecticut and Iowa have fairly-administered “discretionary-issue” carry permit systems. Vermont respects the right to carry without a permit. (Alaska, which has a shall-issue provision for purposes of permit-reciprocity with other states, adopted a no-permit-required law in 2003.) Of the 10 non-RTC states, eight have restrictively-administered discretionary-issue systems; two prohibit carrying altogether.

Click on map for larger graphic.

• The right to self-defense is a fundamental right. The U.S. constitution, the constitutions of 44 states, common law, and the laws of all 50 states recognize the right to use arms in self-defense. RTC laws respect the right to self-defense by allowing individual citizens to carry firearms for protection.

• More RTC, less crime. Violent crime rates in 2004-2005 were lower than anytime since 1976.1 (Crime victim surveys indicate that violent crime is at a 31-year low.2) Since 1991, 23 states have adopted RTC, the number of privately-owned guns has risen by nearly 70 million,3 and violent crime is down 38%. In 2005 RTC states had lower violent crime rates, on average, compared to the rest of the country (total violent crime by 22%; murder, 30%; robbery, 46%; and aggravated assault, 12%) and included the seven states with the lowest total violent crime rates, and 11 of the 12 states with the lowest murder rates.4

• RTC and crime trends. Studying crime trends in every county in the U.S., John Lott and David Mustard found, “allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. If those states which did not have Right to Carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided yearly….[W]hen state concealed handgun laws went into effect in a county, murders fell by 8.5 percent, and rapes and aggravated assaults fell by 5 and 7 percent.”5

• False predictions. Dave Kopel has written, “Whenever a state legislature first considers a concealed carry bill, opponents typically warn of horrible consequences….But within a year of passage, the issue usually drops off the news media’s radar screen, while gun-control advocates in the legislature conclude that the law wasn’t so bad after all.”6 A article related to Michigan’s RTC law said, “Concerns that permit holders would lose their tempers in traffic accidents have been unfounded. Worries about risks to police officers have also proved unfounded….National surveys of police show they support concealed handgun laws by a 3-1 margin….There is also not a single academic study that claims Right to Carry laws have increased state crime rates. The debate among academics has been over how large the benefits have been.”7

• RTC permit-holders are more law-abiding than the rest of the public. For example, Florida, which has issued more carry permits than any state (due to its large population and having had an RTC law since 1987) has issued over 1.2 million permits, but revoked only 157 (0.01%) due to gun crimes by permit-holders.8

Background. Before 1987, there were 10 RTC states. Indiana, Maine, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota and Washington had “shall issue” permit laws. Alabama and Connecticut had fairly-administered discretionary-issue systems. Georgia’s “shall issue” law was interpreted as discretionary in some jurisdictions. Vermont allowed carrying without a permit. Other states had restrictively-administered discretionary-issue carry permit systems or prohibited carrying altogether. These laws remain in effect.

In 1987, Florida enacted a “shall issue” law that has since become the model for other states. Anti-gun groups, politicians and news media interests predicted vigilante justice and “Wild West” shootouts on every corner. The predictions proved false. Through 1992, Florida’s murder rate decreased 23%, while the U.S. rate rose 9%; thereafter, murder decreased both nationally and in Florida.9 Then-Florida Licensing Division Director, John Russi, noted that “Florida’s concealed weapon law has been very successful. All major law enforcement groups supported the original legislation….[S]ome of the opponents of concealed weapon legislation in 1987 now admit the program has not created the problems many predicted.”10 In a 1995 letter to state officials, Dept. of Law Enforcement Commissioner James T. Moore wrote, “From a law enforcement perspective, the licensing process has not resulted in problems.”

• 29 new RTC states since 1987. Of these, 21 previously prohibited carrying; nine (indicated with an asterisk, below) had restrictively-administered discretionary-issue systems. 1989: Oregon, Penna. (Phila. included in 1995), and West Virginia (in Georgia a judicial ruling enforced “shall issue” statewide); 1990: Idaho and Mississippi; 1991: Montana; 1994: Alaska, Arizona, Tennessee and Wyoming; 1995: Arkansas, Nevada*, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah* and Virginia*; 1996: Kentucky, Louisiana* and South Carolina*; 2001: Michigan*; 2003: Colorado*; Iowa* (by fairly administering its discretionary-issue system), New Mexico, Minnesota* and Missouri; 2004: Ohio; 2006: Kansas, Nebraska.

Citizens can defend themselves. Analyzing National Crime Victimization Survey data, criminologist Gary Kleck found, “robbery and assault victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked or to suffer an injury than those who used any other methods of self-protection or those who did not resist at all.”11 In the 1990s, Kleck and Marc Gertz found that guns were used for self-protection about 2.5 million times annually.12 The late Marvin E. Wolfgang, self-described as “as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country,” who wanted to “eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police,” said, “The methodological soundness of the current Kleck and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it. . . . I cannot fault their methodology.”13 A study for the Dept. of Justice found that 34% of felons had been “scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim,” and 40% of felons have not committed crimes, fearing potential victims were armed.14

The right to self-defense has been recognized for centuries. Cicero said 2,000 years ago, “If our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right;” English jurist Sir William Blackstone observed that the English Bill of Rights recognized “the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense” as intended “to protect and maintain inviolate the three great and primary rights,” the first of which is “personal security.”15 Sir Michael Foster, judge of the Court of King’s Bench, wrote in the 18th century, “The right of self-defense. . . is founded in the law of nature, and is not, nor can be, superseded by any law of society.”16

The Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876), recognized that the right to arms is an individual right, stating that it “is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.” In Beard v. U.S. (1895), the court approved the common-law rule that a person “may repel force by force” in self-defense, and concluded that when attacked a person “was entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon him with a deadly weapon, in such a way and with such force” as needed to prevent “great bodily injury or death.” The laws of all states and the constitutions of 44 states recognize the right to armed self-defense. In the Gun Control Act (1968) and Firearms Owners’ Protection Act (1986), Congress stated that it did not intend to “place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms appropriate to . . . personal protection, or any other lawful activity.”

Police aren’t required to protect you. In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, “official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection. . . a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen.” In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, “[T]here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.”

National RTC reciprocity. H.R. 4547, by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), proposes a federal law stating that any person with a valid state-issued carry permit may carry in any other state, as follows: In a state that issues carry permits, its laws would apply. In a state that does not issue permits, a federal standard would permit carrying in places other than police stations; courthouses; public polling places; meetings of state, county, or municipal governing bodies; schools; passenger areas of airports; and certain other locations.

Nonsense from Brady Campaign (formerly Handgun Control, Inc.). Sarah Brady: “the only reason for guns in civilian hands is for sporting purposes;” former HCI Chair, the late Pete Shields: “[If attacked] put up no defense – give them what they want;” Brady Center’s Dennis Henigan: self-defense is “not a federally guaranteed constitutional right.”17 In Jan. 1999, HCI claimed that between 1992-1997 violent crime rates declined less in RTC states than in other states.18 (HCI previously claimed RTC caused crime to rise.) HCI erred in categorizing states as RTC states based upon their having RTC laws in 1997, since only 17 of those 31 states had RTC in 1992. HCI calculated crime trends from 1992 to underrepresent the impact of RTC laws; by 1992 many states had RTC for many years and already experienced decreases in crime. HCI misclassified Alabama and Connecticut as “restrictive” states, doing so presumably because both states had decreases in crime. HCI also credited restrictive laws for crime decreasing in some states. But states that have restrictive carry laws have had them for many years, and crime did not begin declining in those states until the 1990s, and did so due to factors unrelated to guns.

Nonsense from Violence Policy Center: In 1995, VPC claimed Florida’s RTC law “puts guns into the hands of criminals.”19 The claim was false, since the law permits a person to carry, not acquire, a firearm. VPC claimed “criminals do apply for concealed carry licenses,” without noting that such applications are rejected. Contradicting itself, VPC noted that criminals had requested that their rejected applications be reconsidered. “To set the record straight,” Florida Secy. of State, Sandra B. Mortham, said, “As of November 30, 1995, the Department had denied 723 applications due to criminal history. The fact that these 723 individuals did not receive a license clearly indicates that the process is working.” She added, “the majority of concealed weapon or firearm licensees are honest, law-abiding citizens exercising their right to be armed for the purpose of lawful self-defense.”20 In 2001, VPC claimed there are more women murdered with handguns than criminals killed by in self-defense.21 The value of handguns for self-defense is not measured by how many criminals are killed, however. More important is how often people use handguns to prevent crimes and how often criminals do not attack for fear the potential victim is armed. Also, VPC undercounted the number of criminals killed in self-defense by counting only those noted in police reports, thus excluding defensive homicides later determined to have been appropriate.

McDowell math: In March 1995, anti-gun researcher David McDowell claimed that gun homicide rates increased in Miami, Jacksonville and Tampa after Florida’s 1987 RTC law.22 But homicide rates fell 10%, 18% and 20%, respectively, in those metro areas from 1987 until 1993, the most recent data at the time.23 To show an increase, McDowell calculated Jacksonville and Tampa trends from the early 1970s, when rates were lower than in 1993, but calculated Miami’s from 1983, since rates before 1983 were higher and their inclusion would show that the rate had decreased. None of McDowell’s homicides was committed by a license holder, and he did not indicate which homicides had occurred in situations where a permit would have been required to carry a gun. McDowell has also claimed that D.C.’s murder rate decreased after its 1977 handgun ban. In fact, the rate tripled after the ban.24

The 43:1 claim: Based upon a small study of King’s County (Seattle), Washington, gun control supporters claim a gun in the home is “43 times more likely” to be used to kill a family member than a criminal.25 To reach that ratio, self-defense firearms uses are grossly undercounted by counting only cases in which criminals were killed. Most often, when guns are used to defend against criminals, the criminals are only scared off, captured or wounded. Kleck has called the 43:1 ratio and its variants “the most nonsensical statistic in the gun control debate.”26

Mayor Bloomberg: His Group Honored the Boston Bomber

Law Enforcement Disagrees with President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg
Law Enforcement Stands With NRA and America’s Gun Owners

NRA Stand and Fight: We Are America
Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and all other elite politicians trying to marginalize the law-abiding, average American must never forget that they work for us.

Visit to sign up for important updates.

NRA: Barack Obama – “bitter gun owners”
Obama says rural voters are bitter and cling to guns

Learn Gun Safety With Eddie Eagle
The Eddie Eagle GunSafe® Program teaches children in pre-K through third grade four important steps to take if they find a gun. These steps are presented by the program’s mascot, Eddie Eagle®, in an easy-to-remember format consisting of the following simple rules:

If you see a gun:
Don’t Touch.
Leave the Area.
Tell an Adult.

Begun in 1988, The Eddie Eagle GunSafe® Program has reached more than 20 million children — in all 50 states. This program was developed through the combined efforts of such qualified professionals as clinical psychologists, reading specialists, teachers, curriculum specialists, urban housing safety officials, and law enforcement personnel.

Anyone may teach The Eddie Eagle GunSafe® Program, and NRA membership is not required. The program may be readily incorporated into existing school curriculum, taught in a one- to five-day format, and used to reach both levels or simply one or two grades. Materials available through this program are: student workbooks, 7-minute animated video (available on DVD or VHS), instructor guides, brochures, and student reward stickers. Program materials are also available in Spanish.

The NRA is committed to helping keep America’s young children safe. In efforts to do so, we offer our program at a nominal fee. Schools, law enforcement agencies, hospitals, daycare centers, and libraries may be eligible to receive grant funding to defray program costs. Grant funding is available in many states to these groups to cover the cost of all program curriculum materials.

The purpose of the Eddie Eagle Program isn’t to teach whether guns are good or bad, but rather to promote the protection and safety of children. The program makes no value judgments about firearms, and no firearms are ever used in the program. Like swimming pools, electrical outlets, matchbooks and household poison, they’re treated simply as a fact of everyday life. With firearms found in about half of all American households, it’s a stance that makes sense.

Eddie Eagle is never shown touching a firearm, and he does not promote firearm ownership or use. The program prohibits the use of Eddie Eagle mascots anywhere that guns are present. The Eddie Eagle Program has no agenda other than accident prevention — ensuring that children stay safe should they encounter a gun. The program never mentions the NRA. Nor does it encourage children to buy guns or to become NRA members. The NRA does not receive any appropriations from Congress, nor is it a trade organization. It is not affiliated with any firearm or ammunition manufacturers or with any businesses that deal in guns and ammunition.

Gun Control in Canada
International gun control

NRA Tribute to Charlton Heston
Tribute to past NRA president, Charlton Heston

Welcome to the NRA
Join NRA Today and help us protect your Second Amendment rights. The National Rifle Association, chartered in 1871, is America’s foremost defender of Second Amendment rights. We’re proud protectors of history’s patriots – advocating the right to keep and bear arms, advancing the shooting sports and championing gun safety, education and training.

Colion Noir for NRA News: “Ignorance & Politics”
Colion Noir is the first of a group of new NRA News commentators, which will be revealed later this week. Look for weekly episodes on

John Edwards on the Right to Bear Arms
Former Senator and current presidential candidate John Edwards invents new “rights” while dismissing others.

Sarah Palin: 2014 NRA Stand and Fight Rally
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin speaks at the NRA Stand and Fight Rally, an event of the 2014 NRA Annual Meetings in Indianapolis, Indiana.

Obama is Chipping Away at Your 2nd Amendment Rights!
This November, don’t let Obama demolish your Second Amendment rights. Defend Freedom, Defeat Obama.

Hunter – Obama TV ad