Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
 IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts >

IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts

Old 01-18-2004, 02:30 AM
  #1  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: aloha or USA
Posts: 422
Default IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts

Subject: IRS Moves to Threaten Second Amendment Newsletters, E-mail
Alerts


Dear Friends:

I am forwarding this message from Gun Owners of America:

************************************************** ******************

IRS Moves to Threaten Second Amendment Newsletters, E-mail Alerts
>
> Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
> 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
> Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org
>
> Thursday, January 15
>
>
> The ink is barely dry on the Supreme Court's devastating decision in
> McConnell v. FEC -- the so-called campaign finance case that GOA was
> involved in. That decision severely restricted broadcast
> communications, thus making it more difficult for GOA to hold
> legislators accountable on Second Amendment issues.
>
> Now, the IRS is already leaping forward to expand the Court's ruling
> to include GOA newsletters, e-mail alerts, and other Second Amendment
> communications.
>
> Put out for comment on December 23, 2003 -- when, presumably, no one
> would notice -- proposed IRS Revenue Ruling 2004-6 creates a broad new
> set of ambiguous standards which groups like GOA must follow in order
> to avoid losing all or part of their tax-exempt status.
>
> Under the proposed Revenue Ruling, the IRS would create a vague
> "balancing test" to determine whether GOA communications would be
> "permitted" by the government.
>
> If the communication occurred close to an election, mentioned an
> officeholder who was running for reelection, and was targeted to put
> pressure on congressmen through constituents in each representative's
> district, all of these factors would push toward outlawing the
> communication.
>
> Although the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection law was repressive
> enough, the proposed Revenue Ruling would go far beyond this anti-gun
> statute:
>
> * Unlike McCain-Feingold, the proposed Revenue Ruling would not be
> restricted to broadcast ads. Rather, it would apply to
> newspaper ads, e-mail alerts, newsletters, and other
> communications by organizations such as GOA.
>
> * Unlike McCain-Feingold, the proposed Revenue Ruling would not
> automatically exempt communications which occurred more than 60
> days prior to an election -- or which fell below a certain
> monetary threshold.
>
> * Unlike McCain-Feingold, the proposed Revenue Ruling would
> contain no fixed standards for compliance. Rather every GOA
> newsletter or alert would have to be published with the
> realization that the government, after the fact, could apply its
> vague criteria to determine that is was "impermissible."
>
> For example, when GOA learned that an anti-gun rider had been placed
> on a Defense authorization bill in September 2000, GOA alerted its
> members to this provision which would have allowed the Dept. of
> Defense to confiscate and destroy any military surplus item that had
> ever been sold by the government.
>
> M1 Carbines, 1903 Springfields, Colt SAAs, uniforms, ammo, scopes --
> and much more. All these privately-owned items could have been
> confiscated and destroyed by the feds.
>
> GOA generated a groundswell of nationwide opposition against the
> confiscation attempt. But we especially targeted our focus on the
> Senate Armed Services Committee.
>
> The message evidently got through, as the Committee Chairman's office
> called GOA to discuss this problem after he received hoards of calls,
> postcards and e-mails from our members. The provision was removed,
> and Second Amendment rights were preserved.
>
> But had this IRS regulation been in effect in 2000, the agency (which
> then was under Clinton's control) could have RETROACTIVELY punished
> GOA, stating that our activity would have been impermissible if just
> one of the targeted Senators had been facing reelection!
>
> This new regulation would allow lawmakers to load up gun bills prior
> to an election, secure in the knowledge that GOA won't be able to let
> you guys know about them in time.
>
> GOA has formally lodged a protest with the IRS regarding this
> expansion and abuse of power. To read the GOA comments, go to
> http://www.gunowners.org/fs0403.htm on the web.
>
> It is imperative that this rule be defeated!
>
>
> ACTION: Contact your congressmen. Ask them to write the IRS and
> demand that it withdraw proposed Revenue Ruling 2004-6. You can
> contact your Representative and Senators by visiting the Gun Owners
> Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm
> to send them a pre-written e-mail message.
>
> Your Representative and Senators must submit their comments to the IRS
> by January 26.
>
>
************************************************** ******************

Regards,

Joseph R. (Joe) Banister, C.P.A.
Former IRS Criminal Investigation Division Special Agent
japeter2 is offline  
Old 01-18-2004, 11:44 AM
  #2  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Waynesboro Georgia USA
Posts: 1,113
Default RE: IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts

All you have to do is go to the GOA site and click on the contact your leaders button. Type in your zip code and your leaders in Washington pop up. You can send your own letter or use the pre written. Send it to all your leaders in a few minutes, thats all it takes!

Stand up and be heard. Due your duty as a gun owner and defend your rights!!!!!
mike bell is offline  
Old 01-18-2004, 04:10 PM
  #3  
Super Moderator
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 17,852
Default RE: IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts

I think all of this campaign finance reform legislation is a baldfaced attempt at muzzling our freedom of speech. I'm all for publishing which candidate gets money or support from whom. That's common sense. But the government IS NOT allowed to stop anybody from speaking out about elections. That is pure and simple curbing of our freedom of speech.[:@]
CalHunter is offline  
Old 01-19-2004, 05:24 PM
  #4  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Waynesboro Georgia USA
Posts: 1,113
Default RE: IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts

CalHunter,

They are allowed. Its called campaign finance reform!

Its law, and the Supreme Court upheld it!
mike bell is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
johnhunt1975
Whitetail Deer Hunting
2
02-16-2007 05:40 AM
etothepii
Politics
2
04-19-2005 01:01 PM
Cougar Mag
Politics
24
02-02-2005 04:36 AM
deadshot
Politics
13
11-20-2004 09:33 AM
mike bell
Politics
1
02-23-2003 01:42 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Quick Reply: IRS moves to Threaten 2nd Amndmnt Nwslttrs/Email Alerts


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.