Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Media

Ann Coulter Delivers Dire Gun Warning: Universal Background Checks Could Lead to ‘Universal Confiscation, Universal Extermination’ of Firearms

Feb. 5, 2013 8:04am Billy Hallowell

Ann Coulter Warns Against Universal Background Checks, Universal Gun Registration | Hannity

Ann Coulter on “Hannity” (Photo Credit: Fox News)

Commentator Ann Coulter appeared on “Hannity” last night, issuing a dire warning to the American people about universal background checks, a provision currently being touted by gun control advocates. Rather than embracing the proposal, Coulter warned that it could lead to “universal confiscation” and, ultimately, “universal extermination” of firearms.

After speaking briefly with host Sean Hannity about the much-discussed photograph of President Barack Obama skeet shooting, the columnist noted that the president misses the point on the Second Amendment (i.e. the purpose of the constitutional right isn’t so citizens can go skeet shooting; it allows Americans to protect themselves).

“I’m waiting for photos of him taking birth control pills to show him fighting the war on women,” Coulter quipped.

On the gun control front, she gave a passionate speech about how the real problem is mental illness, accusing the left of skirting that issue and embracing firearms control measures that may do little to actually solve the problem. Of particular note, she focused upon universal background checks, launching into claims that implementing them would be potentially-dangerous for Second Amendment rights. Here’s what she said:

“The problem with universal background checks is, we basically have universal background checks now. Any licensed gun dealer is performing a background check. The buyer may not know, someone at a gun show may not know, but if you’re walking through a gun show, everybody’s doing background checks. The only people who are not subjected to a background checks are collectors giving guns to their sons or they’re selling one to their brother-in-law or something. The only way to enforce universal — the last .1 percent of guns that are transferred by collectors and so on — is to have universal gun registration.”

It is here that Coulter noted that U.S. citizens could fall victim to a slippery slope of gun control regulations, inevitably culminating in a loss of the right to bear arms.

“Universal background check means universal registration. Universal registration means universal confiscation, universal extermination,” she continued. “That’s how it goes in history. Do not fall for universal background checks.”

Coulter also went on to lambaste the notion that a gun in the home “is more likely to be used against the owner than to kill an intruder,” something that is sometimes touted by those seeking greater gun restrictions.

“This is a lie they are telling you in order to prevent Americans from self-defense, from protecting themselves so that only the government has a monopoly on guns,” she said of other claims against guns being perpetuated in media.

Watch Coulter’s fiery defense of the Second Amendment, below:

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (218)

txjb
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:59am
Ann !! we already know this ! what do you think all of this is about ? safety ? no ,it’s one world order , and it is steam rolling right over us .

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Verceofreason
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:52am
Ann, like all Foxbots creates and feed paranoia – it’s what they do.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
critterbait
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:51am
Well if this upsets you,,then one may want to find out if Obama has taken down the
AIR DEFENSE SYSTEM for 3000 mi of the Mexico border… I heard it is to be dismantaled by the end of March 2013 .
This will allow low flying missile, rockets and jets to enter the US undetected…If this proves to be true nothing like inviting a strike…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Dagnabbit5
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:49am
If you use “mental health” as a factor do you think any household where the mother has had postpartum depression will be allowed to have a gun in it for “the sake of the children”. etc etc

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Verceofreason
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:53am
  The gubberment has been de-funding mental health and closing down hospitals since Reagan.
  What hypocrites.
  
  Report this comment
- Dagnabbit5
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:06pm
  But they are currently making the entire health care system change over their records to a digital database. So the government will only have to cross reference your address on your gun application or registration with that of anyone’s medical records that live at your house. Any mental problems with your kids, spouse, live in relatives, then no guns for you. Doesn’t matter if the system to treat them is broke. They don’t want to help anyone, they just want a justified reason to take your guns away.
  
  Report this comment
PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:42am
A 20 year psychologist called into Hannity radio on 1/30/13. She said the three types of people that are the most difficult to treat are:

1. Pathological Liars
2. The Entitled – as they are Combative
3. Delusional – with a trance like mania

Some answers to who these types would be:
1. 0 and the Left
2. 0 zombies…the Left
3. 0 zombies

Proponents say the bill does not promote confiscation, yet the text clearly states if you purchased a banned gun before the law takes effect-you will not be able to transfer, sell or gift (even to your children) without first surrendering it to a Federal Firearm Licensed Dealer. The FFL will confiscate anything that is banned including magazines or specifically banned firearm models.

The Exec Orders are the most dangerous. Synchronizing the National gun registry database. Every person involved in the transfer of a firearm must be fingerprinted and undergo a renewed background check. Records kept indefinitely and enhanced with data from other public and PRIVATE sources, in particular H/C records. Within a few years the government will know the precise ownership and location of every firearm in America. Even if outright confiscation is not attempted, LEVYING TAXES AGAINST your firearms will be straightforward and would quickly convince many to sell their firearms to government collection centers.

BY THE WAY NONE OF THE GUN LAWS PAST OR FUTURE ARE CONSTITUTIONAL!
The Dick Act of June 28, 1902 – CANNOT BE REPEALE

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Dagnabbit5
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:55am
  One hope would be to get an actually conservative in office in 2016. A president can override one exec order with another exec order (or so I think) , that is if he/she had the balls/ovaries to do so.
  
  Report this comment
lizaz
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:40am
The real problem IS mental illness…look at all the recent shooters…they’re all nut cases. Figuring out how to stop these people with mental problems is where the emphasis should be. Gun bans are a waste of time….education and gun safety awareness will help law-abiding citizens a lot…..ways to recognize people with mental issues is critical to stopping these massacres.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
geo01
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:33am
.
SHE IS SO RIGHT.
.
But the blind fools that voted this man in office again will support him.
.
IT IS ALL ABOUT CONTROLLING the people in general.
.
EVERYONE knows it will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
.
They will simply BUY THEM BACK from the MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS.
.
Do you realize how many laws you break every day? Most you have never heard of.
.
What’s one more? Break the law…..or lose your power of freedom.
.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
noslave
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:29am
when a dictator wants absolute power,1st he disarms the opposition,then removes them??obammy is l8ke a majician sleight of hand,distraction,diversions??hes setting us up on many fronts,the EPA WILL BAN LEAD BULLETS??,,the CDC OR??will find a way to determin your mental and have to turn in your guns??the schools could pick on your kid till he reacts and then classify him as mental??that will prevent future generations of gun owners??eventually we’ll look like a stallon movie where all are controlled?????

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
frogg
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:27am
There is a new word out there! The word is Sheeple. I don’t think we need to go into what itt means! Don’t be one! Ann is talking about them! Any attempt on restricting our right tobear arms is INFRINGEMENT! Don’t let it happen!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
SamIamTwo
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:23am
Honest officer I sold my weapons to Monica Michelle Brown. I have a copy of the transfer paper work in my file…(J/K in case the SS is collecting data-I’d not sell em, or hand them over-I own them-My property)

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
dockman45
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:19am
She is right……So say you register every gun and do backgrounds on everyone, what then? The next logical step is to turn them in, then what? The PTB have no interest in preventing crime and every interest in controlling the masses. Why else would they aim new laws at people who obey laws and give the law breakers a pass. If the crime in Chicago is off the scale then the people in Chicago should make their leaders deal with it. Banning 30 round mags in Arizona will not help stop gun crime in Detroit. When the libs focus their attention on crime in the inner cities the world will be a better place, my gun is not part of that problem.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
AboveMyPayGrade
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:10am
GOLDOXIDE posted in his 9:26am post, among other things: “When enough people are broke and hungary the streets are going to get dangerous and “require” marshal law.”

Since I’ve seen so many people all over the Internetin the last few years post regarding this possibility, it still amazes me how so many still can’t even NAME it correctly.

For those of you unsure of the concept: it’s MARTIAL, not MARSHALL or MARSHAL, law.

And I’ll pose the same question I frequently have in past days to those who treat this possibility as almost a lead-pipe certainty to happen in this country in the fairly near future: Obama can DECLARE a national state of martial law, but SOMEONE still has to IMPOSE and ENFORCE it. You who are so sure he will do it, please tell me WHO Obama will be able to get to do this.

I may be naive in this assumption (but if I am, I have a LOT of company in this, especially among those who have actually SERVED in the bodies to be referenced, from what I’ve seen on the Internet), but I firmly believe at this point that at least the vast majority of those in our military/National Guard/civilian law-enforcement will NOT obey orders from Obama to turn their weaponry on the American people. The U.S. Army isn’t big enough in itself to impose martial law on a nation of 300+ million.

GOLDOXIDE talked about Obama ordering drone strikes upon the American citizenry. The first such strike will, I believe, trigger a full-scale revolution AND a mass secession

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- AboveMyPayGrade
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:20am
  OOPS!
  
  Sorry, it wasn’t GOLDOXIDE who mentioned Obama using drone strikes on American soil but REDFISH52 in his 9:39am post – although my belief about what will happen if Obama goes here still stands regardless of WHO postulated it.
  
  I’m sure some will suggest that Obama would bring in U.N. “peacekeepers” and/or NATO troops from our European allies to do what our own military/National Guard/civilian law-enforcement won’t.
  
  But as I stated here recently about this possibility, any foreign forces sent to America to do Obama’s bidding to commit atrocities against the American people can expect to take a LOT of casualties: for THEM, America will become “WOLVERINES!” on STEROIDS.
  
  And as we saw with troops our NATO allies sent to Afghanistan, it took a fairly small number of filled body bags coming back to Europe to cause the effeminate Europeans to lose their taste for THAT effort. How much sooner will they lose their taste for watching their boys die wholesale on American soil just for an Obama dictatorship?
  
  U.N. troops HAVE shown their bravery, all right – when it comes to raping defenseless Third World women. But once THEY start getting blooded, they TOO will quickly lose their taste for staying in America.
  
  Report this comment
- txjb
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:07am
  The U.N. troops will enforce it , alone with others that wish to feed their families .
  
  Report this comment
SteveGoodman
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:09am
Ann is not concerned with the extermination “of firearms” as per the lede. It’s “of people” and why we are all so very, very concerned.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
getourcountryback
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:08am
First action before dictatorial rule is to dissarm the private citizen. You bet this administration wants our 2nd amendment rights to be taken away, and our 1st amendment and all the rest. They don’t want a constitutional republic, they have made that clear over and over again. Obama wants to and acts like he is the one and only ruler now in America. I wish someone in Congress would do their job and start impeachment process.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The Third Archon
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:07am
“ANN COULTER DELIVERS DIRE GUN WARNING: UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS COULD LEAD TO ‘UNIVERSAL CONFISCATION, UNIVERSAL EXTERMINATION’ OF FIREARMS”
And after that, your grandmother! Doom, DOOM!! XD

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
SoCtNights
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:03am
The government wants to know who is armed? Pass a National Right to Carry Law then they will know who is armed. EVERYONE!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Verceofreason
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:55am
  They also want to know who owns a car.
  Oh, the horror!
  
  Report this comment
- txjb
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:13am
  Verseofreason, you should think about taking this very seriously .
  
  Report this comment
ShaTang01
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:01am
Those cops behind P-BO must be the most dumbest cops ever assembled!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
AboveMyPayGrade
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:00am
I happened to see Ann Coulter on Hannity’s show last night when it aired.

The author of this thread, Billy Hallowell, stated at the end of his first paragraph: “Coulter warned that it could lead to “universal confiscation” and, ultimately, “universal extermination” of firearms.”

Well, when I heard Coulter use the words “universal extermination” on Hannity’s show last night, I don’t remember HER attaching the words “of firearms” immediately following, so I definitely didn’t get the impression that the “universal extermination” she was talking about last night was universal extermination of FIREARMS, but instead universal extermination of a much DIFFERENT type of aggregation – the same type of “universal extermination” that so many dictators in the last 95+ years have engaged in upon disarming their populations first, and we all know what THAT was.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
denkat56
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:55am
Ann as pretty as you are, and smart too. But okay captain obvious.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
dnewton
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:51am
The government can regulate anything out of existence by simply making it expensive, including licensing, or it can tamper with English language and change the definition of mental illness. The Left already changed the definition of homosexuality from being a mental illness to being socially acceptable. A weapon used in defense is already being called an assault weapon, thus creating the illusion that it can be used only for assault. Karl Marx dreamed of the day when the government took what you produced and gave you what you need. Every time someone says you don’t “need” something and it is implied that the government knows best, it is the ghost of Karl Marx speaking. Marx also predicted that the perfect government would “wither away.” He would be correct if you change “wither away” to collapse into chaos. Universal background checks will refuel the fires of identity theft, which we have not done a very good job of eliminating.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
YOURSENSEI
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:51am
This is what you must know:

Quite a photo of Ann on the story crawl on page 1. Yikes. Showing her age. Still, looks pretty good for a 53-year-old hermaphrodite.

It is so.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Navyguy30
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:51am
I think everyone should write their congress members and tell them to shut the f..k up about guns and concentrate on fixing this economy before we all become Greece…………imho!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
idontknow3
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:40am
This question below or ones like it seem to continue to be asked in a round about way. So – I’ll just ask it outright. Also, If you read and answer this and have access to other sites please copy it and run your own Yes, No, Explain poll. The more times it gets asked maybe eventually the correct answer will be given.

Is any celebrity or any person holding any political office or anyone that is capable of providing for themselves or that has provided for them “armed security” – is their safety of more value or is their position more important to protect than you or any member of your own family?

Yes?
No?
Explain!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
redfish52
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:39am
Its only started…wait until they get around to checking the medical record data bases for anti-depressants and who has gotten prescriptions for them. You will see drones used on American citizens before his term is up. There are hundreds of militia groups that have compounds across the US that will be targeted. If the extended background check bill is passed it will open the flood gate for a massive gun grab as they will set the standards for gun ownership so high only a few would be able to own one..and ex-military people….you might as well turn in your weapons now as you will be targeted first.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- dnewton
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 10:10am
  About forty years ago, my state had an extensive system of gun and ammunition control. You had to get permission from the county sheriff to buy a gun and you had to register all ammunition if you intended to shoot it in a pistol. That system died because it did not work. Theoretically it was against the state constitution because the paper work burden was not compensated. Believe it or not we used to pay merchants to do paperwork including collecting our sales tax. When it came time for a tax increase to pay for our state run health care, the State Constitution was ignored and the merchants became uncompensated tax collectors but they would rather be tax slaves rather than try to compete with the surrounding states with much lower sales taxes. Right now, the state does not know that I recently bought a firearm nor is there any record of how much ammo I bought for it. I registered the firearm however with the manufacturer. These are the records that could be confiscated by the feds to build a database of at least some of the firearms in the US.
  
  Report this comment
UNALIEN
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:39am
should women undergo a universal background check before ending life by abortion..

The argument is stronger than for guns,, all abortions end a life whereas nearly all law abiding gun owners do not, in fact though there aren’t any stats, lawful gun owners save lives.

How do we know that a women is stable enough to make a decision about ending a life…

AMENDMENT XIV

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 3.

1. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or Elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.