Dom Raso encourages Americans to hold themselves to the highest possible standard and to take pride and ownership in the land on which they stand!!
A former member of the U.S. Secret Service Emergency Response Team (ERT) that protected President Bush and Obama at the White House is warning against Maryland’s HB 1302 “Red Flag” bill.
Barry Donadio is a former member of the U.S Secret Service, that is a current Candidate for Queen Anne’s County Commissioner in Maryland. He is pro second amendment and an advocate for gun owner rights.
He is opposed to a new law that would potentially rip guns from Marylander’s based on a very low threshhold of evidence. Actually, the preponderance of evidence to be exact.
That means only 1% more evidence than the opposing side. Just like small claims court. You won’t get your guns taken from you on a beyond a reasonable doubt ruling.
Under HB 1302, it appears that all anyone has to do is testify or potentially lie to the court and then, based on the testimony or potential lie, the court will issue an interim order.
Then you will be required to surrender ALL of your firearms immediately to local Police.
The order may temporarily strip you of your guns, potentially destroy your character, potentialy prevent you from obtaining a pistol permit and almost certainly flag you when you are having an employment background conducted. It will most likey also show up on a search of your name on the Maryland Case File Judiciary Lookup website. All can be based on a fraudulent accusation.
Donadio was quoted and cited the following concerns:
“In my opinion, HB 1302 undermines the U.S. Constitution by denying two constitutional rights, due process and the right to bear arms”
“HB 1302 is potentially the new way to destroy someone’s credibility and assassinate their character as well as their good standing in the community with a false claim. “
“HB 1302 is a sanctioned disarming of the population, one by one with the lowest standard of proof required to do the dirty deed.”
“HB 1302 gives birth to the potential of a new modern day Salem Witch Hunt, reincarnated in the womb by the anti-gun movement”
“I highly doubt HB 1302 will ever stop any gun violence just like the 100+ other gun laws in effect that didn’t stop any gun violence.”
“I find it more probable that this HB1302 will potentially destroy the lives of law abiding gun owners and violate their constitutional rights when false accusations are made”
“ HB 1302 gives another victory to the criminal element, America’s enemies and liberal extremists everywhere.”
Daniel John Sobieski
There is a delicious sense of irony in gun-control advocate Jimmy Kimmel beefing up his armed security after falsely claiming on his late night talk show after the Las Vegas massacre that President Trump had made it easier for the mentally ill to get guns. Guns are okay to protect the liberal elites but not for the rest of us who can’t be trusted or don’t know any better.
The same double standard exists for Democratic members of Congress who demand their constituents be disarmed even as they welcome back Rep, Steve Scalise, the victim of a shooting where a bad guy with a gun was stopped by a good guy with a gun. Many members of Congress are alive today only because Scalise, being a member of the House leadership, had his armed security detail with him
Dr. Kimmel has no way of knowing even now that the Las Vegas shooter was mentally unstable. Certainly the meticulous planning and preparation by the shooter over a long period of time would seem to indicate that while the shooter was evil, he was perfectly competent and sane. Certainly Kimmel’s charge against Trump is not true:
Noting that President Trump had offered prayers for the victims’ families, and that Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said that this wasn’t the time for political debate, he went on: “We have fifty-nine innocent people dead. It wasn’t their time, either. So I think now is the time for political debate.” He reminded his audience that, in February, Trump had signed a bill that made it easier for people with mental illness to buy guns. “The Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, the Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who won’t do anything about this because the N.R.A. has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today. Which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country.”
Steve Scalise owes his life to the Second Amendment, which was written, not to shoot dear, but to shoot tyrants. The Second Amendment was written to protect the other nine in the Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment which gives Jimmy Kimmel the right to sound like the blooming idiot he is.
What President Trump signed was a bill overturning an executive order that would tar the innocent with the broad brush of mental illness, people which included the elderly and veterans, in order to pursue the Obama administration’s gun control agenda:
Here's what happened earlier this year: Congress voted to overturn a last-minute Obama-era regulation that would give the Social Security Administration the power to revoke a person's Second Amendment rights based on whether he receives disability for a mental impairment that keeps him from working, or if he "[uses] a representative payee to help manage their benefits."
As my Washington Examiner colleague David Freddoso explained at the time, the repeal of the Obama-era regulation, "doesn't allow people to buy guns who have been properly adjudicated by a court of law as mentally ill or unstable."
The Obama-era rule was designed to take away people's rights without due process of law. It would have flagged the names of people who, for example, have an anxiety disorder or depression which keeps them from working, and who, as the SSA puts it, ‘need help in managing [their] personal money affairs,'" he added. "As the many non-political mental health and autism advocacy groups that supported the House action noted, there is no link between these factors and a propensity for violence."
The Obama administration repeatedly tried to use mental health as a means, not to make us safer, but to deny us our gun rights under the Second Amendment. Consider President’s pick of Dr. Vivek Murthy to be our Surgeon General, someone who firmly believes gun control is a health issue, something that can and should be used to gut out Second Amendment Rights. As Investor’s Business Daily editorialized during his confirmation process:
Murthy's approach to attacking the Second Amendment has been to say private ownership of firearms is a public health issue. The 37-year-old Murthy is president and co-founder of the anti-gun group Doctors for America, which advocates ObamaCare and gun control laws. His group, which has been dubbed Docs vs. Glocks, has pushed Congress to ban "assault" weapons and "high capacity" magazines.
Doctors for America has promoted the invasion of privacy by doctors by advocating they ask patients if they have guns at home, including asking children if their parents own guns. He would have doctors counsel their patients against exercising their Second Amendment rights. One wonders how private that information would remain if entered into the medical records the government would be privy to under ObamaCare.
Back in 2013 a piece of legislation called Toomey-Manchin proposed that doctors be allowed to unilaterally place a patient’s name in the background check system in a way that violated patient doctor confidentially under HIPAA as well as our Second Amendment Rights:
The Toomey-Manchin proposal contains a provision that lets a doctor add a patient to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) without ever telling the patient he or she has been added.
This would seem to violate doctor-patient confidentiality, due process and the presumption of innocence in one fell swoop.
As the Heritage Foundation reports, this "gun control legislation eliminates any (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) privacy protection for mental health records in connection with the NICS system, leaving only what privacy protection the attorney general cares to provide."
The Obama administrations idea of keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill is based on a bizarre and discriminatory definition of who might be mentally unstable. Back in 2013 it was reported that the Veterans Administration was sending letters to vets warning them that they might be declared mentally incompetent and have their Second Amendment rights stripped unless they could prove otherwise:
The contempt by the Obama administration for our Constitution and our rights has reached a new low with news the Veterans Administration has begun sending letters to veterans telling them they will be declared mentally incompetent and stripped of the Second Amendment rights unless they can prove to unnamed bureaucrats to the contrary….
"A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. 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)," the letter reads….
While mental health is a factor in the current gun control debate and recent mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., and Aurora, Colo., and elsewhere have in common the questionable mental state of the shooters, to single out returning vets from Iraq and Afghanistan this way is unconscionable and unconstitutional.
As the Los Angeles Times has reported, the Obama administration woulf like to make our Social Security records part of the background check system. The move would strip some four million Americans who receive payments though a “representative payee” of their gun rights. It would be the largest gun grab in U.S. history.
A potentially large group within Social Security are people who, in the language of federal gun laws, are unable to manage their own affairs due to "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease."
There is no simple way to identify that group, but a strategy used by the Department of Veterans Affairs since the creation of the background check system is reporting anyone who has been declared incompetent to manage pension or disability payments and assigned a fiduciary.
Keeping guns out of the hands of the truly mentally unstable is a worthy goal, but it should not be used as a cause for disarming veterans who carried a weapon in defense of their country or senior systems who might need some assistance in paying their bills.
They deserve the presumption of innocence, and sanity, every bit as much as Vester Flanagan. Stripping away their Second Amendment rights in the name of mental health would be a gross injustice that would not make us safer, butwould merely create millions of unarmed victims for the next shooter with an agenda.
Daniel John Sobieski is a free lance writer whose pieces have appeared in Investor’s Business Daily, Human Events, Reason Magazine and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.
How Scalia and Ted Cruz Saved the 2nd Amendment
Since the passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the GOP presidential field has, in a rare show of unity, supported Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s statement that Scalia’s replacement should be determined by the results of the November election. Democratic hypocrites like Sen. Chuck Schumer accuse the GOP of obstructionism, the memory of their blocking of George W. Bush nominees having faded.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/how_scalia_and_ted_cruz_saved_the_2nd_amendment.html#ixzz40deSgbXk
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
After California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein’s legislation introduced in Congress last year, which would have imposed the biggest gun ban in American history failed, you would figure she would have tucked her tail between her hairy thighs and moved on to some other worthless legislation sure to fail. But not this old dog, she is determined to remove the 2nd Amendment from the American people’s rights.
Feinstein is circulating a letter on Capitol Hill calling once again for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and asking for President Barack Obama to keep his State of the Union promise to make 2014 a “year of action.”
Dear Mr. President:
During your State of the Union address, you stated that you want to make 2014 a “year of action.” We write to urge you to take immediate action to address the significant number of assault weapons that are being imported into the United States in contravention of federal law. We respectfully request that you take steps to ensure that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) fully enforces the ban on the importation of these military-style firearms.
A provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 925(d)(3), prohibits the importation of firearms that are not “generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.” In recent years, however, importers of firearms have taken advantage of ATF’s interpretation of the “sporting purposes” test to evade the import ban. In 1998, the Department of the Treasury — which then housed ATF — issued guidance that interpreted the import ban to prohibit only semiautomatic rifles that use magazines originally designed for a military rifle. Many semiautomatic firearms on the market today do not have a military origin but are modeled closely after military firearms. These military-style firearms are not prohibited under the current import ban, even though they are functionally equivalent to prohibited rifles with a military origin. In addition, the Treasury Department’s 1998 guidance allows foreign-made firearms to be imported into the United States without military features, even though these firearms have the capacity to fire multiple times in quick succession without the need to reload and can easily have military features attached.
Sen. Feinstein’s diatribe against the 2nd Amendment continues in a long and nauseating attack that would unfortunately make everyone sick if the entire letter were placed here. In short, she is asking our President to do what he has done some many times before – make an executive order to ban the firearms that keep America safe from an overbearing government.
What amazes me is how this beastly woman can still be in office? Does anyone really listen to what she is saying? In 2013 Feinstein said all veterans have PTSD and should have their Second Amendment stripped. She may be even further left than the President himself!
Even the admittedly liberal newspaper, The Los Angeles Times printed an article by – Columnist Burt Prelutsky, where he may have given the best quote about the Senators from California ever.
“Frankly, I don’t know what it is about California, but we seem to have a strange urge to elect really obnoxious women to high office. I’m not bragging, you understand, but no other state, including Maine, even comes close. When it comes to sending left-wing dingbats to Washington, we’re Number One. There’s no getting around the fact that the last time anyone saw the likes of Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Maxine Waters, and Nancy Pelosi, they were stirring a cauldron when the curtain went up on ‘Macbeth’. The four of them are like jackasses who happen to possess the gift of blab. You don’t know if you should condemn them for their stupidity or simply marvel at their ability to form words…”
Seriously folks, if the left wing main stream media is ridiculing their own, how are we supposed to take them seriously?
This article by George F. Will, is one of the worst pieces of tripe I have ever read on the subject of so-called “immigration.”
How can this man, with his unremarkable views, call himself a conservative when he is so eager to collude with the surrendering of our country to “La Reconquista?”
Conservatives believe in conserving the republic for their posterity, not surrendering it as a petri dish experiment in social engineering for the elites, to pave the way for the ascendancy of Big Brother.
“The last gasp of white America; understand that!”- says the cheeky Mechista.
What part of this affirmation from a hostile foreign power—in active annexation of American territory—does Mr. Will not understand?
It is completely beyond comprehension how a man of such great intelligence as Mr. Will, can comport himself as a pigeon-brain and lackey of vested interests.
What Tower of Babel would he build, in his quest for “vibrancy?”
How can the reader take any of Mr. Will’s madcap notions seriously—most particularly regarding “assimilation” of the Mexican peasant army-- when he lacks a basic grasp of what constitutes “immigration,” as he fails to differentiate wholesale invasion of America, from valid immigration policy.
Should not a pundit be able to winnow-out the sugar granule from a pile of sand, like the wise ant?
This writer believes that it was Fred Thompson who said that it is “time to start offending people” and this article falls into alignment with that view, as it deals with politicians and journalists who would unremittingly force the Mexican conquest onto the American people against their will.
This republic does not need snake-oil salesmen or traitors in the sacred halls of government or media.
The American people will not eat this “bad penny” which continually returns like a nightmare, no matter how many times the American people swat it down, or how many times the central bankers try to shove it down our throats.
We the People, are sick-to-death of the quislings who infest the Beltway and the airwaves, continually exhorting us to solve Mexico’s domestic and international problems !
According to Mr. Will, “Many Republicans see in immigrants only future Democratic votes.”
Wrong! Such a Simple Simon view and warped weltanschauung must be discounted with mocking laughter, cat calls and hisses.
It must also be directly challenged with facts and reality.
Conservatives see a territorial incursion—in the form of a blatant race war— prosecuted against the United States of America by Mexico and Mr. Will, would encourage us to open wide the gates of Rome to the barbarians who have come—by their own admission-- to supplant Americans!
Has George Will ever read the works of the great Patrick J. Buchanan, regarding the “bright shining lie” of free trade?
If he had, he would not be waxing sentimental about Bill Clinton and NAFTA:
Is Mr. Will aware of Mr. Buchanan’s take on the subject of attempting to “assimilate” an obvious invader?
Does Mr. Will not understand what constitutes national suicide, in the form of any tolerance for a vigorously professed genocidal race war against white America?
It was Mexico which first established the concept of “Deguello,” which is the belief that no quarter be given to the enemy.
Tell us, Mr. Will; how tenderly did Mexican forces treat the small band of American defenders at the Alamo?
Is it not you, with the “dim memory?”
Should America not return the “favor” in this Second Mexican War, by following the ground rules of engagement first established by Mexico?
Mr. Will asks the question: “Are we sure they are resisting assimilation?”
This has got to be the most asinine question of all time, betraying the mindset of those politicians and pundits, who exhort us to play fair with an invader, as if it were a civil rights or constitutional issue.
Americans are “pretty sure” that the Mexican nationals in our midst—telling Anglo-Saxon America to “go back to Europe”—are not too keen on any idea of assimilation with the “gringo.”
"We have an aging white America. . . . They are dying. . . . They are shitting in their pants with fear! I love it! We have got to eliminate the gringo and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him.”
--Jose Angel Gutierrez, professor, University of Texas, Arlington; founder of La Raza Unida political party; and beneficiary of American generosity.
Will talks about the “East Germanization” of the Mexican border, implying that one race or people is being kept apart, when such comparisons are the equivalent of erecting a straw man argument for Mexican annexation of the American heartland.
Mexican nationals-by their own cheeky admission—are here to “take over.”
The American people have “had it” with the Mexican invasion and are in no mood to suffer the indignity of serving as a cash cow and financial slave to wretched mestizos and degenerate lawmakers, especially when our own people are living in tent cities alongside the railroad tracks of major metropolitan areas.
It is the position of the American people that the U.S. is the cradle of the Anglo-Saxon race, NOT the Mexican, no matter how many Mexican eggs are deposited by stealth warfare, in the nest of the American Eagle as a switcheroo.
George Will makes a spurious and unenlightened charge that: “Opposition to immigration because the economy supposedly cannot generate sufficient jobs is similar defeatism. Zero-sum reasoning about a fixed quantity of American opportunity is for a United States in a defensive crouch, which is not for conservatives.”
“Supposedly," he says?
George Will must also imagine that disenfranchised young Americans are going to shoulder paying for “Obamacare,” if he subscribes to the absurd notion that opportunity is endless during a time of universal, worldwide depression. Never mind granting concessions to invaders with no strings attached.
Does this brilliant “solon” not know that one third of Americans are out of work—that AMERICAN college graduates cannot find work to pay off their student loans and that thirty year-olds are living with Mom and Dad?
Does he think it a good idea that young Americans of all colors—including Hispanic Americans--- be unable to have a future, because their living space and jobs have been stolen by interlopers from the Third World?
Does Mr. Will not see how the central bankers have hijacked America and that these third world hordes come at the behest of vested interests, to be employed as corporate shock troops and modern-day “Hessians” against the American people?
Does Mr. Will fathom what is at stake here? Does he understand that this nation and its future belongs to the American people and NOT the Third World, or the United Nations?
The real state of our Union is that it is in dire straits, due to the fact that irresponsible and criminal lawmakers seem hell- bent on forcing young Americans—who are living in their parents’ basement—to surrender their collective future to an alien race and culture.
Now hear this: No American should have to compete for jobs with third world wretches in his own country.
This position is the only course which will ensure that Americans remain an exceptional people—based on ONE common culture-- rather than a mish-mash of debt slaves and what President Theodore Roosevelt described as a “tangle of squabbling nationalities.”
The American people are here to remind the Beltway that We the People, are NOT the Santa Claus of the World, nor are we debt slaves to the banksters.
We further assert that the traditional host/parasite relationship between the United States of America and Mexico is O-V-E-R.
The American people are embroiled in the Second American Revolution, to throw off the debt shackles to usury. They do not have time to entertain any nonsense from border-breachers regarding their “rights,” based on a sense of their own self-entitlement.
The American people are resolved to return these wretched scarecrows of “La Reconquista” back to from whence they came, so that they may prosecute their own revolution in Mexico City, rather than meddle in and subvert the American political process.
The occupation army of 40 million Mexican nationals must be forcibly expelled from American territory—if they refuse to self-deport-- before the American people feel inclined to grant any concession to Mexico.
They—unlike Speaker Boehner—will not surrender an inch, until Mexico comes to the glaring realization that its bid for carving a “new mestizo nation” out of American territory is NOT going to happen, no matter what kind of a ruckus they think they are going to make.
Mexico must be punished for its arrogant stance, by being forced to sign articles of surrender, so that in future, it makes no “politically incorrect” mistake about American resolve to repel the Mexican incursion.
The American people require clarification from Mexico regarding what it deems American and what it sees as distinctly Mexican, as the present definition by Mexico engenders the grapes of wrath for our people.
This stance of the American people, is non-negotiable and any lawmaker or pundit who imagines otherwise, will self-immolate politically.
Is George Will aware of the number of people on food stamps? What planet is Mr. Will from? Seriously!
Does he really imagine that we as a people, should simply lie down for his absurd argument, not to mention the insult he made against Americans, with his patronizing assessment of our “dim memories?”
These are the ravings of a “whacko bird.”
“Many are understandably disposed against immigration because they have only dim memories of a more dynamic United States and have ‘little aptitude for politics’ suited to, and aimed at restoring, vibrancy.”
Hogwash! This is an insult to the intelligence of a vigilant, deliberate and revolutionary people.
This writer remembers when America was ninety percent white. Will is not addressing a dumbed-down audience, as there are millions of Americans who remember when America was powerful, feared, respected…and “vibrant” based on the achievements of Anglo-Saxon Americans—not an alleged “Muslim achievement in space” contribution to NASA.
George Will —through his condescending attitude—has betrayed himself as an elitist and tool of the central bank.
It is he, who obviously has “little aptitude for politics,” at least in the wide-awake sense.
Nor does he possess a rapport with or empathy for, the serious plight of the American people, for if he did, he would not be a carnival shill for amnesty.
Like most establishment types, Mr. Will functions as a vassal and jumping jack cheerleader for the vested interests. He serves as an intellectual prostitute.
He promotes the sunset of decline—even as he professes “vibrancy.”
Will paints an abstract picture when he states: “A mass murder committed by mostly Saudi terrorists resulted in an almost limitless amount of money being made available for the deportation of Mexican house-painters.”
Such a vainglorious attempt to evoke sympathy for Mexican invaders--by painting them as innocent victims-- is a “no-fly zone” for the American people.
This is patently untrue, as evidenced by the recent thwarted plans of Mechistas, who intended to march on Washington D.C., demanding their “rights” to annex America for Mexico.
It’s not about "house painters," but it is about the theft of America and American jobs, through Mexican invasion and the corresponding end of the American Dream.
The American people can admire the two Mexican men who walked barefoot across a fiery desert, in order to save their shoes for employment. We would welcome such men as honored guest workers in our agricultural industry, where they do not directly compete with Americans.
But first, the American people require final clarification from Mexico, regarding its territorial ambitions, as we ostensibly came to accord with that nation in 1848 and there is a question as to who owns what in Mexico's national psyche.
Mexico has a sense of self-entitlement to the American landscape, based on a roughly 25 year tenancy.
Maybe California should be returned to Russia, due to the occupation of Fort Ross--which predates the Mexican claim-- under this demented line of reasoning?
The American people too, have a “set of principles” and a cardinal principle is that this nation does not reward interlopers, nor does it transfuse its lifeblood into the veins of the invader.
Any agreement between the United States and Mexico must be predicated on Mexico’s understanding that it has NO CLAIM HERE.
The American taxpayer does NOT owe Mexican nationals one thin dime. These parasites are NOT the responsibility of our people.
The governed will deny their consent to any special consideration for Mexican nationals, until Mexico signs formal articles of surrender, in this Second Mexican War AND agrees to make provision for the upkeep and accountability of its nationals, while they are guests here, including retroactive restitution to American victims of the Mexican crime wave.
Further, due to the current criminal history of Mexican interlopers in America; the American people insist that Mexico build service centers in America—at their own expense, much like America does at Gitmo in Cuba-- in order to isolate its nationals from the general population, as we are discussing slave labor for corporate America here, NOT potential American citizens.
Mexican nationals have lost any chance for tolerance from the Americans they have victimized.
How keen will the proponents of CIR and amnesty be, when they realize that Mexico must meet ALL financial obligations for housing, education, entertainment, medical and dental care and providing a social safety net in the form of a Mexican social security program for its own people, while they are guests here?
Mexico is a nation wealthy in natural resources and tourist destinations and can well afford to pay its own way, rather than sponging off the American people, as a common carrion crow.
Any “comprehensive immigration reform” plan which fails to hold Mexico financially accountable for its own nationals while they are guests here, will be grossly unacceptable to the American people.
Mexican obligations must be outlined before any forward momentum can take place in bilateral relations between invader and the one invaded.
Such an article of surrender requires documentation, as we are discussing matters of race war here—not “immigration.”
It is NOT the responsibility of the American taxpayer to subsidize his own demise, nor grant “citizenship” to a cheeky invader.
The American people regard the absurdity of alleged "dual citizenship," to be nothing more than a ploy of war.
"Comprehensive immigration reform" means holding Mexico accountable for prosecuting a blatant race war against America.
GA homeowner shoots one of three suspects who broke into his home – photo credit – Decatur 11AliveTV
When a homeowner has a break-in it is more than just an invasion of their privacy. It is an attack on their sense of safety and security. So you can imagine the anger that a Georgia homeowner felt when he was surprised by burglars who broke into his home a second time, reported Guns n Freedom.
The homeowner who was on an afternoon lunch break called 911 and as was to be suspected the police would not arrive in time to deal with the three thugs. Enough was enough and the homeowner decided that he had the only type of justice these three thieves would understand. He , “at that point pulled out a personal firearm and fired, striking one of the suspects,” commented Capt. Stephen Fore of the Dekalb County Police
By Oscar Y. Harward
The United States of America was founded on certain principles; principals that our Founding Fathers felt were necessary to insure the future viability of this Country and the governing structure as they had envisioned. Their applied wisdom, embedded in our Constitution, is irrefutable.
Today (y)our Federal Government is rapidly drifting away from the intent and expressed commands of the Constitution. The all-consuming quests for power at Federal levels are far exceeding the intent of our founding fathers and the intent as they had envisioned into the Constitution.
The Founding Fathers were striving to create a system of check-and-balance insuring that our Federal Government would remain a Republic. The United States was founded by a collection of 13 States united to give a central voice in international affairs, a limited national affair, to regulate commerce, and to harmonize across-state laws. They even gave the States the right to withdraw from this Republic if they felt the Republic was not fulfilling its responsibility to the State(s).
Our Founding Fathers fought incredibly hard for our Independence from England. These men understood the value of a free people's government in protecting the peoples’ freedoms and rights. If anyone has any question on this issue, they should read the Declaration of Independence; a Document that should leave no question(s) as to our Founding Fathers intent.
Furthermore, the "Federalist Papers" will further substantiate the defined intentions as incorporated within the Constitution.
Every student in all schools should be required to read, understand, and achieve the ability to articulate the details and limitations within our Constitution and its’ full understanding. The same student requirements also apply to the Federalist Papers.
Each candidate for election seeking any and all ‘Federal’ office(s), or any appointed manager in any Federal government department, should be compelled to openly share his/her personal detailed knowledge, findings, and conclusions on our Constitution and the Federalist Papers, before their approval.
Our Founding Fathers, with their wisdom, set up three branches of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary); all of equal significance so neither of the three branches of government could supersede any of the others.
Article I, Section. 9 of or Constitution addresses "State's Rights" and their taxes: "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State".
In 1832, President Andrew Jackson made the first substantive attack on "State's Rights" when he sent troops to Charleston, SC in response to their refusal to submit to a tariff on goods exported to northern States. Fortunately, cooler heads convinced him to recall the troops before they reached Charleston. Vice-President Calhoun did resign in protest and wrote the "States Right's Doctoring". In 1861, President Abraham Lincoln sent troops to South Carolina in response to their threat to withdraw from the Republic.
While each of the ‘Bill of Rights’ Amendments are of significance in difference to different individuals, one as a ‘sore of dispute’ with me is where President Obama, his administration, and Capitol hill Democrats seem to ignore, attack, disobey, and prosecute (y)our Constitution in my personal life is the Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
The Tenth Amendment is now under attack and in violation of the Constitution by President Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder. Several States’ Amendments, as passed by the voting electorate, are under attack and prosecuted by this administration; even though these Amendments are in compliance with our US Constitution. While our Constitution was based on Christian values, President Obama and AG General Eric Holder are filing Federal lawsuits against these ‘States Rights’ Amendments.
Today, we have legislation named as ‘Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’ more often called ‘ObamaCare’ as passed in early 2010; defined by SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts as a tax bill. Today, President Obama is passing out ‘waivers’ to Labor Unions, his own staff, Capitol Hill legislators, and other political friends. Whenever in US History was a President able to dictate in giving ‘waivers’, other ‘differences’, or ‘exceptions’ to others on tax issues while requiring the remaining ones to pay; another unconstitutional active violation? Additionally, this legislation is not working as promised. ObamaCare is not protection and is not affordable to middle Americans. ObamaCare legislation does characterize a ‘redistribution’ of the wealth.
Throughout our history, Moderate to Liberal Presidents and ‘Liberal’ Capitol Hill legislators continue to whittled away at our Founding Fathers in expand entitlements to other Americans and others around the world; some who have fallen through the cracks and in real need, while others desire all and will take anything and everything without helping themselves. These latter ones would not work in a pie factory where all food was for free. This is contrary to the intent of our Founding Fathers who wanted to provide an opportunity for all. All of these entitlements are at (y)our taxpayers’ expense; now mostly with out-of-control deficit spending.
Why do ‘Liberal’ legislators always want to support and vote for spending more of taxpayers’ money? Why should those who are motivated to work harder and smarter, in creating a better life for themselves and their own family, be penalized?
The evolution of our Federal Government has reached the point where one or two States may champion a cause and have a National law passed along party lines. National laws supersede the laws of any individual State. Effectively, a few States or even cities, seem to believe they have the ability to impose their will on all other States.
For example, the Second Amendment protects (y)our ‘RIGHTS’ to gun ownership: 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 right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” With that being totally clear, New York, Chicago, and others elected and appointed officials seem to believe they can supersede the Constitution. Each elected and appointed officials responsible for their derogatory irresponsibility should be imprisoned, themselves. (Y)our schools should be teaching ()our children gun safety, the use of guns in hunting for food, and to protect their self and their family from criminal activity.
The Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Many Americans with a left-wing view are even denying ‘life’ as unalienable Rights of human life; even denying (y)our ‘Creator’ in Heaven.
Reality law appears to be from passion without reason being applied. We see a passion for power and notoriety without the reason to see, or understand, the effect it has on the American people. Laws are written by lawyers and politicians with personal and political agendas; their only constraints are usually, but not always, in the limits of the law; absent morality.
Under current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), we have recently seen in the Senate a 225-year old law changed so that a single majority political party could gain absolute control of the Senate. This change is reducing the 225-year old law from a previous 60 votes out of 100 Senate votes to proceed with legislative action to a now 51 votes out of 100 votes to proceed.
Today the intent, and the explicitly, of our Constitution seems to have been largely forgotten by our elected officials in the White House and on Capitol Hill. We see a manipulation of the laws and we see, somewhat, absolute partisanship.
We see President Obama and the Democratic Party united with a common agenda without regard for the History of this America, without respect for the sacrifices made by our Founding Fathers, without respect for the wisdom embedded in the Constitution, and/or more than 600,000 Americans who gave their lives in wars to protect our Constitution, and our American Flag. We see President Obama and the Democrat National Committee (DNC) that may compel each elected Democrat to toe-the-line on these ‘left-wing’ issues so as each candidate to ascertain DNC monies for (re)election(s).
What we see is a rapidly evolving Democrat Party that views itself as a ruling party answerable only to itself. A ruling party that can pass laws at will, change laws by decree, and exert dominion over the people. We see President Obama and the Democratic Party as a party that uses the law but does not have an appropriate understanding of or reverence for the law. We see President Obama and the Democratic Party as having an insatiable thirst for revenue - and history has shown that thirst ultimately leads into conquest. If we continue on this course, without respect to the intent of the Constitution, we will see the evolution of a ruling party over an oppressed populace?
This is not idle speculation, read the history of the rise of the Nazi party during the 1920's and 1930's. In the USA, we have seen laws changed and people exempted from the law through decrees by our President and we are seeing the Democrat Party change procedural law in order to obtain and exert more control. We are beginning to visualize a spiraling taxation generated by a forced ObamaCare plan that seems to ignore the people's hardships and further suppresses the populace, all in the name of this same Party sponsored plan.
This is a control over the populace that is far more reaching than just providing a national health care. It is a control over the livelihood and wellbeing of the populace forcing them to be dependent on the Government - and dependence removes the option of choice.
It is well within reason to assume that ObamaCare is just an early step in increased governmental control that will evolve to the point where our Government can decree the level of healthcare we are allowed, disallowed, or to receive. This makes us further dependent on our Government and gives it much greater control of our lives. By definition, this is truly a form of conquest.
It can be visualized that the implementation of ObamaCare is an important cornerstone in the governmental evolutionary process; a process which will allow implementation of an absolute monitoring of the populace under the guise of protecting people's health welfare.
If this is the case then there is a high probability that within less than a decade we will see increased electronic tracking of the populace, including the requirement that any individual using ObamaCare must have a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) device implanted on their person under the guise of insuring accuracy of healthcare and preventing fraud. If we carry this visualization further we can envision a point where the Government can use our healthcare information to determine our acceptability in society, whether it be a chemical or mental imbalance (real or perceived), to remove undesirables from the populace for the safety of the populace.
Although the Constitution does not address political parties we do have a two party landscape today; Republican and Democrat. With both the Senate and President being from the Democrat Party and seemingly in full accord that the Government appears to have evolved into an only one controlling Democrat Party.
The Republican Party can be discounted, or considered a non-player, for several reasons; the first being that the powers of the Senate are greater than that of the House, thus giving the Republicans limited ability to effect change, the second being that, of the three branches of government, the two most singularly powerful are controlled by the Democrats and they appear to be in full collusion.
The Capitol Hill Republicans appear to be fragmented. The RINO Republicans appear to be in bed with the Democrat Party on more and more deficit spending. Many Americans are inquiring as to what is any difference between a Capitol Hill RINO Republican and a Capitol Hill Democrat.
Americans are listening and TEA Party Republicans are gaining strength across the USA among the Republicans at large. Political polls show that Americans are now seeking a more Conservative leadership in Washington, DC.
Is President Obama's signature achievement investing all in ObamaCare? Has, or is Capitol Hill Democrats too embedded in their support of ObamaCare to get out? Is it too late for Capitol Hill Democrats? Is ObamaCare just a stepping stone for President Obama and the Democratic Party; a major step for something more far reaching - maybe the evolution of a Socialist form of government?
A major problem in the USA today is that many in our schools, colleges, our universities, and even our law schools are just not teaching our children/students World and US History, the Declaration of Independence, our US Constitution, and/or our Founding Fathers’ ‘Federalist Papers’. Our children are being cheated for not be exposed and taught more about our US History.
As Judge Robert Bork once said, "Few professors spend even a week on Story [former Chief Justice Joseph Story's commentaries on the Constitution], or The Federalist Papers [the Founders' commentaries on the Constitution], or the original Constitution. I know I didn't [at the University of Chicago Law School].... Nobody in law schools is teaching the Constitution. They are teaching Supreme Court opinions."
Every voter should be required to pass a simple test on our US History, our US Constitution, and our Founding Fathers.
Every politician going to Washington should know and understand the Declaration of Independence before taking this/her oath of office. If they understood its’ meaning, each would have a much greater realization and appreciation of this great nation.
"Those who do not remember their past are condemned to repeat their mistakes." George Santayana (1863 – 1952), philosopher, essayist, poet, and novelist.
‘We, the people’ must remain vigilant in both our understanding and awareness of our government and of the people we place in office if we really want to keep America a land of the free.
1st question on "expanded background check" form: 1. Are you a liberal democrat, Muslim or, a combination of the two?
Gabrielle Giffords, Mark Kelly to Challenge NRA in 2014
Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly want to challenge the NRA in Congressional races in 2014.
Ten months after the heinous crime at Sandy Hook Elementary and six and a half months since a Tucson gun store owner refused to sell Kelly an assault weapon--believing he could not pass question 11a of the NICS background check--Giffords and Kelly are readying themselves to go after the NRA for opposing expanded background checks.
According to ABC News, Kelly says he and Giffords "would like to spend in the 2014 elections what the NRA spent in 2012."
To do this, they are raising funds via their gun control group, Americans for Responsible Solutions (ARS).
Kelly admits the NRA does a great job getting its message out; between its successes in 2012, its victory against expanded background checks in the Senate in April 2013, and the ouster of two pro-gun control senators in the Colorado Recalls, the NRA is not only winning but is fast setting the terms of the debate as well.
Yet Giffords and her husband say background checks must be expanded, and that is where they plan to lock horns with the NRA.
It is worth noting that besides being denied an assault rifle in March of this year, the requirements of our current background check system also halted a handgun purchase Kelly tried to make in February. Thirteen days before successfully passing a background check for a 1911-style semi-automatic handgun, Kelly walked into Diamondback Police Supply in Tuscon, AZ, and was not allowed to buy a handgun because he showed an ID from Texas instead of Arizona.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins.
Round one of the gun control battle on Capitol Hill has been seemingly won by default by the protectors and supporters of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment. This win for gun rights advocates became obvious to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) this week. He ordered Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to pull the so-called assault weapons provision from the bill. This bill had been passed by the Democrat controlled Judiciary Committee.
This comes on the heels of what appeared by many vote counters inside the Washington D.C. Beltway to be headed for total defeat. Even Reid’s own count reportedly indicated the most Democrat votes, that could be mustered to support the assault weapons ban was only 40. This is far less than the 60 votes President Obama needed to prevent a Republican filibuster of the bill. This is a victory for gun rights in the continuing congressional gun control battle
For the hysterical claims and attacks raised by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's in an attempt to strong arm national gun rights supporters with their bluster, it is a bitter defeat. This is also an important set back to the hysterical theatrics that the president displayed as he attempted to use his bully pulpit to force congress to submit to his will after the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.
Despite the facts that demonstrate the shooter Adam Lanza, was suffering from apparent severe mental illness issues, Obama resorted to scare tactics to pin the blame on gun rights. This is where he failed to exercise true presidential leadership. He clearly purposed his focused on fear mongering because it was what the liberal media hysteria machine wanted and craved. After all, who would be able to sustain the withering assaults from the main stream media, he had to reason.
But, Obama and the alphabet soup of media networks underestimated the commitment of gun rights and constitutional advocates who were unwilling to witness nor permit the undoing of those basic rights Americans who dear. When the president felt he was falling back on what he thought was an easy target, gun owners, gun owners and supporters instead locked arms and moved forward!
Even former astronaut Mark Kelly’s recent cheap trick to spur on support against gun owners did not prevail. He tried to resurrect the legitimate sincere sympathy Americans felt over the attack upon his wife, former congresswoman Gabby Giffords. She had survived a vicious attack in an armed assault against her which resulted in the tragic deaths of six victims in Tucson, Arizona in January 2011.
Kelly tried in vain, in March to dramatize that the legal buying of an AR-15 style weapon was somehow a national news story special bulletin about the evils of assault style weapons. It fell flat, because Kelly had purchased the gun legally and had gone through the proper legal guidelines to register the weapon. So where was the story and where was the news if everything he did was legal?
Dianne Feinstein Gun Bill: Text, List Of Guns Banned And Details Of 'The Assault Weapons Ban of 2013'
- February 8, 2013 from 10am to 2pm – State Capitol BldgAt our state Capitol in Sacramento. We'll come unarmed, this time. The anti-gun forces are on a collision course with the Second Amendment- and the People. While we are in accord on keeping guns out…Organized by We The People Have Had Enough | Type:rally
future events! ......
February 23 Saturday probably about noon- will advise
Upcoming Events: http://venturacountyteaparty.ning.com/events
With everything happening to this country of ours it is getting harder and harder to maintain a cool head and not jump to conclusions but if we sit back and view the last four years as well as what’s happening now an image is starting to appear of what might possibly be our future.
During President Obama's first term he laid the ground work. President Obama issued over 144 executive orders, many dealing with martial law. As the Supreme Court already opinioned when looking at President Lincolns use of martial law, "Martial law ... destroys every guarantee of the Constitution.". This means when martial law is declared we as Americans have no rights at all.
During President Obama's first term he wrote Executive Orders granting the government the power to take over all communications media, electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals. He also wrote an Executive Order where the government can take over all modes of transportation and control of the highways and sea ports. That means Obama can confiscate your horse, your donkeys, your bicycle or even your riding lawn mower. All forms of transportation. Executive orders signed by Obama also include railroads, inland water ways, public storage facilities, airports and airplanes including commercial planes can all be taken over by the government.
Think that’s bad, well it gets worse, much worse.
Executive Orders have also been signed allowing the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision. To take over all health education and welfare functions. To allow the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations, AND grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute Industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.
If that doesn’t scare you then look at this. An Executive order has also been signed which allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when the president declares a state of emergency, Congress cannot review the action for six months.
Now why that last part that congress cannot review the action for six months? To understand why President Obama wanted that executive order lets look at what martial law is. Martial law is the suspension of civil authority and the imposition of military authority. When we say a region or country is "under martial law," we mean to say that the military is in control of the area, that it acts as the police, as the courts, as the legislature. The president is the commander in chief of the military and as such in full control of the martial law. Seeing how the constitution is suspended during martial law and the President is in control the only ones able to stop martial law is the congress. In effect that Executive order that says Congress cannot review the action for six months in effect give the President full unchallenged control for six months.
A little tidbit to add to martial law here is that our constitution Article 1, Section 9 states, "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." The concept of the of Habeas Corpus is that a person may not be held by the government without a valid reason for being held. A writ means the government would have to provide a person to a court to show just reason for holding them. With the suspension of the writ the government can detain and hold a person indefinitely.
In a nut shell a President can declare martial law, would have six months of free reign to do as he pleases while rounding up any congressional opposition to his martial law and detaining them indefinitely and doing this totally legally.
In order for a president to declare martial law he must have a valid reason to do so. For that lets look at our present situation. Today we have a president whom has openly declared war on the second amendment to our constitution. This is causing a great deal of civil unrest in the nation. Being told that their actions are unconstitutional doesn’t slow the President down at all, in fact it emboldens him to push even harder. To top that off our President is also pushing us to the fiscal cliff of ruin. When asked about the out of control spending our President replies that we do not have a spending problem. Top that off with our government printing money as fast as possible as well as demanding unrestricted borrowing powers we can see we will be heading to a financial meltdown very soon. A financial meltdown coupled with civil unrest over constitutional violations would be the catalyst for open revolt and exactly what would be needed in order to openly declare martial law. Then we all are doomed.
By Oscar Y. Harward
The radical ‘left’ in politics and the ‘mean-stream’ Medias are manipulating Americans on proposed changes in laws to outlaw our rifles, shotguns, pistols, and its’ accessories. Their ill-promoted campaigns are to deceive Americans that all hunters, sportsmen/sportswomen, and/or others will not be affected by their legislation; but only to eliminate victims of all guns.
Our Founding Fathers were well aware most men were hunters who went out to kill wildlife in providing meat to feed themselves and their families. Hunting for food with guns was no concern for creating the Second Amendment.
Read the US History http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm! The primary purpose of the Second Amendment was and is to make sure Americans were never to be denied adequate weapons to compete in a battle against a ‘mutinous government’.
Who should or would want to own a weapon with a magazine that holds 40 cartridges? Anyone who wishes to protect himself/herself, his/her family, our Constitutional freedoms, and wishes to maintain whatever is necessary for these protection(s), and/or when any of us foresee the potential(s) who may decide to overrule our Constitutional freedoms and when mutinous government official(s) have weapons with a magazine that holds 40 cartridges. This is when you and I must demand that we, too, be allowed to compete in the battle with weapons against any individual(s), group(s), government(s), etc. for the protection of our lives, our families, and our Constitutional freedoms.
Look around. Talk to your family, friends, and neighbors. Many are now in fear of a potential mutinous government right here. Many elected and appointed officials are ignorant, ignoring, and/or disobeying our Constitution, US Code, and many other laws as they choose; without even being investigated, arrested, and/or prosecuted.
Do not be misled by the ‘left’ in politics and/or by the ‘main-stream’ Medias. Become more educated by our Founding Fathers. http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndfqu.html
We must keep and protect our Second Amendment. It was and is intended to protect Americans from a mutinous government.
KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE BALL! The Second Amendment’s intent was and is to protect Americans from a ‘mutinous government’, not just allowing sportspersons to hunt for wildlife.
U.S. Constitutional right to bear arms
Gun Appreciation Day is not just a time to celebrate the right to bear arms, but it is a time to acknowledge the precious gift that no other nation on earth possesses. This is the gift for every man and woman in this nation to stand toe to toe with an oppressor either foreign or domestic; and announce, “As for me and my family my right to bear arms will not be abridged nor shall it be stolen!”
This day is your way of demonstrating that constitutional gun rights do matter. This is your opportunity to stand up and acknowledge that a nation that fought a War of Independence to be free from tyranny of an imperial elite will not bow on bended knee to a 21st century version of that now residing in the White House. January 19th is the nation’s day to go to your local gun range, gun store or gun show and bring your American Flag and a ‘Hands off my Guns’ sign to show your support!
In fact, according to a national Fox News poll released Friday, January 18th, 71 percent do not think tougher laws can stop shootings like the mass killings that occurred in Newtown, Connecticut in December. “Nearly twice as many voters say there would be less violent crime if more law-abiding Americans owned guns, than if guns were banned.”
On the other hand, liberal gun control organizations have launched advertising campaign to scare parents in homes across America into accepting the tepid rationale of President Obama’s official response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. Obama wants to disarm America be frightening America with edicts that do not address the reason for the mass killings.
No parent in America wants to be on the receiving end of a call from a school or receive a knock on the door from a police officer about fatal shootings at their child’s school. Yet, in the post Sandy Hook Elementary school shootings era, gun control alarmists have ratcheted up their threats on gun rights, by using the main stream media. The words of these media talking heads has been vitriolic and poison the airwaves that permeate American homes daily with lies.
Gun control measures are not new and one of the most infamous examples where this has been used as a precursor to attacking its own citizens was done by Adolph Hitler and his Nazi government, five years after being in power. Sound familiar.
In 1938, the Nazi Party enhanced the Weapons Law and enacted handgun control. Firearms ownership was restricted to Nazi party members and other "reliable" people. Later that year, the government barred all Jews from owning any weapons or seeking weapons from businesses that sold them.
By Oscar Y. Harward
Based on our Second Amendment freedoms, it should be ‘unconstitutional’ for law-abiding citizen(s) be required in any state to complete any government form(s), other than a ‘legally valid’ Photo Identification (ID), prior to purchasing any hunting rifle, shotgun, or pistol.
An ‘instant’ National Instant Criminal Background Check System investigation should and would immediately ‘qualify or deny’ each individual’s right to purchase a hunting rifle, shotgun, or pistol.
Use of a hunting rifle, shotgun, a pistol, etc., was addressed by our Founding Fathers only as “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”.
Many left-wing elected and appointed officials, and other activists who yearn in abolishing the Second Amendment often refer to these armaments only as hunting guns; rifles, shotguns, and/or pistols, but their characteristic descriptions are not metaphors from our Founding Fathers.
The ‘right of the people to keep and bear Arms’ discussions were referenced by our Founding Fathers only as a form of protection for individuals, their families, and a protection ‘from’ a lawless and mutinous government.
Any and all ‘elected and/or appointed’ government officials, who require, create, and/or command a recorded public record of purchasing, owning, and/or possession of a weapon, as defined, are themselves the ‘lawless’ in creating and recording additional illegal and unconstitutional freedoms, legislations, and/or regulations.
There is a sickening aroma in the air that is beginning to permeate the very soul of independent freedom embracing Americans. It began to originate long before the shooting at Aurora, Colorado, or recently in Newtown, Connecticut. Its rancid fragrance seeps into the fabric of the U.S. Constitution and is emitted by the control terrorists who manipulate the facts and perceptions of Americans who watch the news. These purveyors of stricter gun control measures seek to erode your defenses so that in your weakened state you will accept their sweet smelling tyranny.
The nation that was represented as a symbolic shining city on a hill that President Ronald Reagan spoke about over 30 years ago is now becoming a broken mud hole of shattered dreams. America’s morning that has dawned over the nation is now bearing witness to the shredding of constitutional protections which have safe guarded families since the infancy of the republic. Obama has given the order to Vice President Biden: full steam ahead to obliterate gun rights in your town. You and your family are the targets and what will you do?
The reaction by gun owners and even prospective gun owners to Obama’s desperate executive order zeal is to hurry up and buy up all the potential guns and now legal weapons. The worry is that these legal weapons might be taken by edict or by force by the government. That may be a logical solution, but it is only a temporary one.
Once Obama’s federal government has quenched its thirst on stripping away gun rights, it will not hesitate to take the next step to criminalize actual possession of legally held banned weapons!
Then what will you do?
What is the response to a government that embraces tyrannical rule over the constitutional guarantees and protections contained within the U.S. Constitution?
What are you, the father, the mother, the son or the daughter prepared to do when, the government official, acting on direct orders from a new commission set up by President Obama to confiscate your guns, comes to your home’s door?
Where are the defenders of the U.S. Constitution who are elected in Congress? Are you absolutely certain they will not give in, and knuckle under Obama’s determination which is aided by the mainstream media talking heads?
Remember these are the same talking heads that avoided Obama’s dismissive behavior in not enforcing congressional legislation. This is the same mainstream media that buried the White House Benghazi murder cover up as if it never happened. Think about your choices when seeking to rely upon the once independent fourth estate, which has been rendered a useless patsy for the Obama administration.
Do you really believe that once your guns are banned, and the weapons that were grandfathered in and off limits from government seizure, will not be taken in the second round of gun control legislation?
We have been here before. We stand in the shadow of Tyranny, and it drives an unbearable chill through the souls of Free Men. The last time we stood here, we threw off the mountain of Tyranny against us, stood on our principles, brought a just war against our oppressors in government, and exposed ourselves and our Brethren to the full light and warmth of Liberty.
The shadow of Tyranny has once again fallen across our country. The chill to Freedom is quickly becoming unbearable. Again.
How do we pull back this blanket of Doom?
It will be the Citizens. Not the Government, but the Patriotic Citizens of We The People.
The Battle of Athens was an armed rebellion led by WWII veterans and citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the tyrannical local government in August 1946. The local Sheriff had illegally closed the polls, stolen the ballot boxes, and recused himself to the local courthouse to 'count' the votes.
It did not end well for him.
It did end well for Liberty.
Here is the story... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5ut6yPrObw&feature=player_detai...
It might have to come to this again for Freedom to remain.
But this time, it won't be in Athens, Tennessee...it will be in Washington D.C.
And it will come when they ATTEMPT to disarm us.
Live Free or Die Trying.
December 27, 2012
Photo: Michael Saechang.
California Democrat Dianne Feinstein will introduce legislation in January calling for the fingerprinting and registering of all gun owners in the United States.
On her Senate web page, Feinstein states her proposed legislation will add fingerprinting and photo identification to the National Firearms Act.
A firearms seller must currently submit Form 4473 to the government containing the name, address, driver license information, NICS background check transaction number, serial number and model of the firearm, and a short federal affidavit stating that the purchaser is eligible to purchase firearms under federal law. Feinstein’s bill will add a substantial layer of bureaucracy to the existing regulations.
The effort to expand firearms registration will include weapons grandfathered prior to the enactment of Feinstein’s proposed legislation. In other words, all gun owners will be required to register their constitutionally guaranteed firearms with a federal government inimical to the Second Amendment.
Feinstein’s registration process will likely surpass New York City’s handgun permit process, which is a bureaucratic nightmare. In addition to non-refundable fees totaling over $500, the permit process demands two recent color photos, a birth certificate, proof of citizenship and residence, a blizzard of affidavits, and other red-tape hurdles. Applications are routinely denied for spurious reasons, including non-violent misdemeanors and depression.
As Dean Weingarten notes, gun registration is de facto gun confiscation. Following mandatory gun registration, the government “will know who has legal possession of each firearm. They will know where the firearm is stored. When physical possession of the gun is desired, they can order you to turn it in. This has happened repeatedly,” most notably in Nazi Germany, Red China and Soviet Russia.
More recently, it has occurred in Kosovo, Great Britain, Australia, New York, and California. If Feinstein has her way next month, it will happen across America.
Democrats and their Republican co-conspirators are going all out to ban firearms. Feinstein’s bill will ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of 120 specifically-named firearms, including semiautomatic rifles, handguns, and shotguns that can accept detachable and fixed magazines and have “one military characteristic.”
In addition, Feinstein’s bill will outlaw flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, thumbhole stocks and bullet buttons on firearms.
Make no mistake about it. Obama and his anti-Second Amendment allies in Congress are coming for your guns. If they have their way, the only legal firearms in America will be rifles with 10 round magazines and single shot and bolt-action rifles – and those firearms will be registered with the government and may be confiscated at any moment.
This article was posted: Thursday, December 27, 2012 at 1:15 pm
Note: this page contains paid content.
Please, subscribe to get an access.