Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! Interesting stuff Paint me surprised by this Some Scary thoughts You have to be kidding, right!?!

Disarm the IRS, De-Militarize the Bureaucracy, and Dismantle the Standin

John Whitehead

“There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation and which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors that those governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from keeping such instruments on foot but in well-defined cases. Such an instrument is a standing army.”—Thomas Jefferson, 1789

What does it say about the state of our freedoms that there are now more pencil-pushing, bureaucratic (non-military) government agents armed with weapons than U.S. Marines?

Among the agencies being supplied with night-vision equipment, body armor, hollow-point bullets, shotguns, drones, assault rifles and LP gas cannons are the IRS, Smithsonian, U.S. Mint, Health and Human Services, FDA, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Education Department, Energy Department, Bureau of Engraving and Printing and an assortment of public universities.

Add in the Biden Administration’s plans to swell the ranks of the IRS by 87,000 new employees (some of whom will be authorized to use deadly force) and grow the nation’s police forces by 100,000 more cops, and you’ve got a nation in the throes of martial law.

We’re being frog-marched into tyranny at the end of a loaded gun.

Make that hundreds of thousands of loaded guns.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the number of federal agents armed with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment, authorized to make arrests, and trained in military tactics has nearly tripled over the past several decades.

As Adam Andrzejewski writes for Forbes, “the federal government has become one never-ending gun show.”

While Americans have to jump through an increasing number of hoops in order to own a gun, federal agencies have been placing orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of hollow point bullets and military gear.

For example, the IRS has stockpiled 4,500 guns and five million rounds of ammunition in recent years, including 621 shotguns, 539 long-barrel rifles and 15 submachine guns.

The Veterans Administration purchased 11 million rounds of ammunition (equivalent to 2,800 rounds for each of their officers), along with camouflage uniforms, riot helmets and shields, specialized image enhancement devices and tactical lighting.

The Department of Health and Human Services acquired 4 million rounds of ammunition, in addition to 1,300 guns, including five submachine guns and 189 automatic firearms for its Office of Inspector General.

According to an in-depth report on “The Militarization of the U.S. Executive Agencies,” the Social Security Administration secured 800,000 rounds of ammunition for their special agents, as well as armor and guns.

The Environmental Protection Agency owns 600 guns. The Smithsonian now employs 620-armed “special agents.”

Even agencies such as Amtrak and NASA have their own SWAT teams.

Ask yourselves: why are government agencies being turned into military outposts?

What’s with the buildup of SWAT teams within non-security-related federal agencies? Even the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education Department have their own SWAT teams. Most of those officers are under the command of either the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Justice.

Why does the Department of Agriculture need .40 caliber semiautomatic submachine guns and hollow point bullets? For that matter, why do its agents need ballistic vests and body armor?

For that matter, why do IRS agents need AR-15 rifles?

Why do local police need armored personnel carriers with gun ports, compact submachine guns with 30-round magazines, precision battlefield sniper rifles, and military-grade assault-style rifles and carbines?

Why is the federal government distributing obscene amounts of military equipment, weapons and ammunition to police departments around the country?

Why is the military partnering with local police to conduct training drills around the country? And what exactly are they training for? The public has been disallowed from obtaining any information about the purpose of these realistic urban training drills, other than that they might be loud and to not be alarmed.

We should be alarmed.

As James Madison warned, “We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.”

Unfortunately, we’re long past the first experiment on our freedoms, and merely taking alarm over this build-up of military might will no longer suffice.

Nothing about this de facto army of bureaucratic, administrative, non-military, paper-pushing, non-traditional law enforcement agencies is necessary for national security.

Moreover, while these weaponized, militarized, civilian forces which are armed with military-style guns, ammunition and equipment; trained in military tactics; and authorized to make arrests and use deadly force—may look and act like the military, they are not the military.

Rather, they are foot soldiers of the police state’s standing army, and they are growing in number at an alarming rate.

This standing army—a.k.a. a national police force—vested with the power to completely disregard the Constitution and rule by force is exactly what America’s founders feared, and its danger cannot be overstated or ignored.

This is exactly what martial law looks like—when a government disregards constitutional freedoms and imposes its will through military force, only this is martial law without any government body having to declare it: Battlefield tactics. Militarized police. Riot and camouflage gear. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Drones. Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Concussion grenades. Intimidation tactics. Brute force. Laws conveniently discarded when it suits the government’s purpose.

The militarization of America’s police forces in recent decades, which has gone hand in hand with the militarization of America’s bureaucratic agencies, has merely sped up the timeline by which the nation is transformed into an authoritarian regime.

Now we find ourselves struggling to retain some semblance of freedom in the face of administrative, police and law enforcement agencies that look and act like the military with little to no regard for the Fourth Amendment, laws such as the NDAA that allow the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens, and military drills that acclimate the American people to the sight of armored tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, and combat aircraft patrolling overhead.

This quasi-state of martial law has been helped along by government policies and court rulings that have made it easier for the police to shoot unarmed citizens, for law enforcement agencies to seize cash and other valuable private property under the guise of asset forfeiture, for military weapons and tactics to be deployed on American soil, for government agencies to carry out round-the-clock surveillance, for legislatures to render otherwise lawful activities as extremist if they appear to be anti-government, for profit-driven private prisons to lock up greater numbers of Americans, for homes to be raided and searched under the pretext of national security, for American citizens to be labeled terrorists and stripped of their rights merely on the say-so of a government bureaucrat, and for pre-crime tactics to be adopted nationwide that strip Americans of the right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty and creates a suspect society in which we are all guilty until proven otherwise.

Don’t delude yourself into believing that this thinly-veiled exercise in martial law is anything other than an attempt to bulldoze what remains of the Constitution and reinforce the iron-fisted rule of the police state.

This is no longer about partisan politics or civil unrest or even authoritarian impulses.

This is a turning point.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we are sliding fast down a slippery slope to a Constitution-free America.

If we are to have any hope of salvaging what’s left of our battered freedoms, we’d do well to start by disarming the IRS and the rest of the federal and state bureaucratic agencies, de-militarizing domestic police forces, and dismantling the police state’s standing army.

ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at staff@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Some Red Hot Gospel there!

IRS Spent $10 Million on Weapons Since COVID-19 Pandemic Began: Watchdog By Katabella Roberts

The Internal Revenue Service building in Washington, on Feb. 19, 2014. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has been splashing out millions stocking up on guns, ammunition, and combat gear since 2020, according to the findings of Open The Books, a watchdog group that tracks government spending.

report by the watchdog, published on April 27, found that the agency has spent a total of $10 million on weaponry and gear since the COVID-19 pandemic began, including $2.3 million on duty ammunition, $1.2 million on ballistic shields, and another $1.3 million on “various other gear for criminal investigation agents.”

Additionally, the agency has spent $474,000 on Smith & Wesson rifles, $463,000 on Beretta 1301 tactical shotguns, and $243,000 on body armor vests since 2020.

Another $467,000 was reportedly spent on duty tactical lighting, $354,000 on tactical gear bags, and $267,000 on ballistic helmets in the same time.

The report, called “The Militarization of Federal Bureaucracy,” contains updated data through the end of March 2023.

Since 2006, the IRS has splashed out $35.2 million (adjusted for inflation) on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment. The report found that 2020 and 2021 saw them spend increased amounts.

Internal Revenue Service logo
A sign for the IRS building in Washington, on Sept. 28, 2020. (Erin Scott/Reuters)

Billions in IRS Funding

An IRS Criminal Investigation spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement, “IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) special agents are sworn federal law enforcement officers who conduct criminal investigations into tax violations, money laundering, cybercrimes, as well as organized crime involving drugs and gangs.”

“The agency’s approximately 2,100 IRS-CI special agents use firearms as part of their official law enforcement duties and must participate in annual firearms training, briefings, and practical exercises to demonstrate they are proficient to carry firearms,” the spokesperson continued. “The agency purchases the required amount of ammunition and firearms to conduct its official duties.”

The latest report comes as Republican lawmakers have raised concerns regarding the nearly $80 billion in IRS funding, including $45.6 billion for “enforcement” that the IRS is set to receive through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

While the IRS employed 80,006 full-time staffers as of the 2022 budget year, according to the agency’s strategic operating plan (pdf) released on April 6, the Treasury Department has claimed that the agency could hire 86,852 new employees over the next decade in order to bolster operations if it were to receive the nearly $80 billion in funding.

Republicans, including House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), are concerned that the additional funding could be used to target everyday American. However, the Biden administration has vowed that the money will lead to more audits for wealthy millionaires, billionaires, and large corporations.

Epoch Times Photo
IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel testifies before the Senate Finance Committee, on Feb. 15, 2023. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

IRS Denies Targeting Middle-Income Americans

Separately, then-IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig stated in a letter to members of the Senate in August last year that the additional funding will “absolutely not” be used to increase audit scrutiny on small businesses or middle-income Americans and will instead help the agency in “challenging” areas such as audits of large corporate and global high-net-worth taxpayers.

The Open The Books report also comes after current IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel told lawmakers last month that the agency plans to hire an estimated 360 additional staff who are authorized to carry guns over the next five years.

“Our CI division or Criminal Investigation Division, they do not conduct audits,” Werfel said during a House Ways and Means Committee hearing. “What they do is, they are investigating acute issues of fraud and tax evasion. And typically, they’re armed when they’re putting themselves in danger.”

The IRS Careers website for criminal investigation special agents states that applicants must be willing to “carry a firearm, must be prepared to protect him/herself or others from physical attacks at any time and without warning and use firearms in life-threatening situations; must be willing to use force up to and including the use of deadly force.”

Open The Books’ report also found that since 2006, 103 “rank-and-file” agencies outside of the Department of Defense spent $3.7 billion (adjusted for inflation) on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment, 27 of which are traditional law enforcement under the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security.

Open The Books founder and CEO Adam Andrzejewski said in a statement that “a culture of militarization has permeated across the federal bureaucracy.”

“In many cases, these agencies are stockpiling the very weapons some politicians seek to ban citizens from owning,” Andrzejewski added.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

From Bookworm Room

Why the Second Amendment matters

I don’t usually share emails, but this one is so good about the types of Americans who legally own guns, and why we need those guns, that I couldn’t resist.

Again, I didn’t write this. I don’t know who did. It’s clearly been making the rounds for a long time:

My old Grandpa said to me, “Son, there comes a time in every man’s life when he stops bustin’ knuckles and starts bustin’ caps and usually it’s when he becomes too old to take a whipping.

I don’t carry a gun to kill people; I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil; I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the World.

I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government; I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry; I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone; I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man; I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate; I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don’t carry a gun because I love it; I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police protection is an oxymoron: Free citizens must protect themselves because police do not protect you from crime; they just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

Personally, I carry a gun because I’m too young to die and too old to take a whoopin’!

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY…

PLEASE DON’T THINK FOR A MOMENT, THAT THIS COULDN’T HAPPEN IN OUR COUNTRY ALSO !!!
———————–

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control: From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
In 1911, Turkey established gun control: From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
———————–
Germany established gun control in 1938: From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
China established gun control in 1935: From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
Guatemala established gun control in 1964: From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
Uganda established gun control in 1970: From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
Cambodia established gun control in 1956: From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
———————–
56 million defenseless people were rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.
———————–
You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun control laws adversely affect only the law abiding citizens

With guns, we are ‘citizens’; without them, we are ‘subjects’.

During WW II, the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

Gun owners in the USA are the largest armed forces in the World!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.

The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES A GUN TO EVERY HOUSEHOLD!

SWITZERLAND’S GOVERNMENT ISSUES AND TRAINS EVERY ADULT IN THE USE OF A RIFLE

SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!

IT’S A NO BRAINER! DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL law abiding CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

I’m a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!

If you are too, please forward this. If you’re not a believer, please reconsider based on these true facts.

This is history; not what’s being shown on TV, sanctioned by our illustrious delusional leaders in Washington.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" You have to be kidding, right!?!

“ALL THAT NONSENSE ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT” by CARL BUSSJAEGER

Lefty Russ Baker says it’s time to get rid of America’s guns. And that pesky Second Amendment isn’t a problem. If he’s trying to climb out of his recent obscurity, he didn’t think it through. His solution?

Just ignore it.

Why Nearly All of America’s 400 Million Guns Have Got To Go
Everyone already knows all the reasons “nothing will be done.” Congress, as currently constituted, will not pass meaningful legislation. We need a better Congress. Courts are more interested in protecting the dubiously cited Second Amendment than in protecting kids. We need better judges and better law.
[…]
So I would say that the rest of us need to stop mollifying them. Forget all that nonsense about the Second Amendment.

Just forget it. After all…

Obviously it won’t be easy, and a small number of Second Amendment hard-liners will resist violently

Only a few will resist. Of course, that’s “only a few” of more than one hundred million people. Based on surveys I’ve seen for the past few years, more like 120 million. Russ’ stormtroopers will be in trouble if even 5% of 120 million “resist violently.” Six millions HANSOBs would make quick work of them, despite Baker’s irrational belief otherwise.

None will actually defend us against our military or other militaries. Guns in the hands of untrained, unvetted, potentially irresponsible users do much more harm than good. Period.

Tell it to the Taliban. Or the four terrorists who tied up 90,000 police and troops for days.

Untrained? He might note the large number of gun-owning military veterans. Or the competetion in the field of firearms training classes. Or the millions of concealed carry licensees, which is several states requires training.

The boy is delusional.

But note his disdain for the courts upholding that stupid 2A. Where have we seen that before?

Occasionally-firing-Cortex, demanding that the Xiden administration just ignore court decisions that she’s dislikes.

The current “Campaign to Delegitimize the U.S. Supreme Court” with dubious ethics complaints, and again, calls to ignore rulings.

I do see that Baker does like one — former — Justice’s “opinion” on the 2A.

Even conservative Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger said the argument that it referred to individual gun ownership (and not the clearly stated “well-regulated militia” being necessary to “the security of a free State”) was a misrepresentation of the Constitution, law, and history.

I love how these anti-rights types trot out that Parade magazine opinion from an elderly retiree. If Burger truly thought that the 2A was being misinterpreted…

why didn’t he use his position as Chief Justice to espouse it, instead of waiting until retirement to write an opinion column not subject to Associate Justice ridicule and judicial dissent?

I’ll see Baker’s 30-something year-old magazine opinion, and raise him four real SCOTUS decisions: HELLER, MCDONALD, CAETANO, and BRUEN. That’s on top of MILLER, CRUIKSHANK, PRESSER, and even DRED SCOTT, all prior to Burger’s little adventure in post-retirement attention-seeking.

Baker had better hope that the Courts don’t get disavowed. The little remaining confidence in the courts is the only thing standing between himself, and his doorkickers, and six to twelve million heavily armed, non-compliant SOBs.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

We Need to Call Out the Gun Control Liars When They Lie About the Efficacy of Gun Control By TTAG Contributor

By Rob Morse

Lies come in many shapes and sizes. Some are simple exaggerations. Some are absurd falsehoods. Unfortunately, we tend to believe a plain, bold-faced lie if it’s expressed with enough emotion. That’s the same kind thing keeps viewers watching and clicking so the press is often more interested in outrage than in the truth.

A lie doesn’t become the truth no matter how many times it’s repeated, but the lie may help politicians get re-elected if it’s repeated often enough and believed by enough likely voters. We need to call out every lie we see even if that means calling some of our “respected elected officials” liars.

Congressman Jamaal Brown, you are a liar. Representative Jimmy Gomez, you are a liar. You both lie when you say that you want to save lives, and claim that gun-control laws will actually protect our kids. That’s an easily provable falsehood that both of you continue to repeat.

Why do politicians hide the truth behind their emotional outbursts? The simple answer is that it helps them get what they want most…namely press coverage and campaign contributions.

Democrat Congressman Jimmy Gomez of California said that Republicans should resign from office if they are not going to pass more gun-control legislation.

 

Democrat Representative Jamaal Bowman of New York yelled at reporters that “Republicans won’t do sh!t when it comes to gun violence.”

 

Implied in both of those statements is the lie that gun-control laws actually save lives, and that anyone who won’t support more gun-control laws is either corrupt or heartless. Both claims are a false. If their-Democrat controlled cities — New York and Los Angeles — weren’t so ideologically corrupt and unwilling to police and prosecute criminals, maybe there would be fewer young men shooting at each other on the streets of the Congressmens’ districts.

Gun-control costs lives and endangers our children in their schools. Before you can believe that you need to know that armed defense by ordinary citizens is common. Americans use a firearm to stop threats of death or bodily harm about 2.8 million times a year. That’s over 7600 times a day.

In addition, ordinary citizens with guns prevent several hundred thousand more crimes every year. These armed good guys stopped untold violent crimes just by virtue of their being armed. That’s good, but our virtue doesn’t stop there.

We started to train and arm volunteer school staff a decade ago after the mass-murder at Sandy Hook in Connecticut. We have now accumulated several thousand man-years of experience with these armed volunteers. You might have missed that their efforts have worked in the best possible way. The presence of armed teachers and others has prevented attacks at their school. Let me underline that for you.

We have never had a mass-murder at a school that had a program of trained and armed school staff.

Perspective is everything when we want to understand the truth. Only one criminal out of six uses a firearm in the commission of a violent crime. Criminals use firearms about a quarter million times each year and they violate our “gun-control” laws millions more times. That means that gun control is and has been a failure.

In contrast, we defend ourselves with a firearm about 2.8 million times every year. Mass murderers take about 600 lives a year. We protected hundreds of thousands of our children with armed school volunteers every school day. If you haven’t heard it before then I’m telling you now…armed self-defense is far more common than the criminal use of a firearm.

Politicians who push for more gun control say their laws will disarm criminals. In fact, their 23,000 gun-control regulations — already on the books — disarm far more honest citizens than they do criminals. Mass murderers deliberately attack us in gun-free zones where we are disarmed by law.

Politicians and the news media don’t tell us everything we need to know to make a reasoned decision. It’s deadly public policy to solve a small problem by creating a larger one. We can’t save hundreds of lives by sacrificing tens-of-thousands. If we really want to save lives, then we’d repeal our gun-control laws rather than passing more of them. That won’t work for gun-control politicians who feel the need to shout to get reelected. If gun-control advocates really wanted to save lives, then they would stop lying.

How many more innocent lives should we sacrifice on the altar of failed gun-control?

I’m giving you facts, but facts don’t matter to gun-control ideologues. For them, the ideal of gun-control is an end in itself rather than an instrumental means to save lives. Mass murders are simply an excuse to disarm more honest citizens.

I am not running for office, but I am trying to influence your opinion. Lies matter when we want to deceive. Facts matter when we want to save lives. Time and again, Democrats and Socialists in the USA have said that only Democrats care about children, and everyone else doesn’t care if kids die. I’m calling that a lie. Lives matter to me and they matter to you.

It is uncomfortable to call someone a liar but it gets easier with practice. I did it this time. I’m asking you to do it the next time you hear them lie about us.

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Some Red Hot Gospel there!

Ya think?

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

SAF Sues Washington State Over Black Rifle Ban by S.H. BLANNELBERRY

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Washington, challenging the constitutionality of the recently enacted House Bill 1240, which bans the manufacture, sale, import, and distribution of many semi-automatic firearms.

SAF claims the new law — which took effect immediately — infringes on Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights and is seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions from the court.

The lawsuit, named Hartford v. Ferguson, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Hazel Dell retailer Sporting Systems, and three private citizens, Brett Bass, Douglas Mitchell, and Lawrence Hartford. The plaintiffs are represented by Seattle attorney Joel Ard.

Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson and several county sheriffs and prosecutors are named as defendants in the lawsuit.

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb criticized the state for putting politics above constitutional rights.

SEE ALSO: Viral Video: Tuber Almost Blows Out Eye in Tannerite Accident

“The State has enacted a flat prohibition on the manufacture, sale, import and distribution of many types of firearms, inaccurately labeled as ‘assault weapons,’ which are owned by millions of ordinary citizens across the country,” said Gottlieb in a press release obtained by GunsAmerica.

“In the process, the state has criminalized a common and important means of self-defense, the modern semiautomatic rifle,” he continued. “The state has put politics ahead of constitutional rights, and is penalizing law-abiding citizens while this legislation does nothing to arrest and prosecute criminals who misuse firearms in defiance of all existing gun control laws. It is absurd.”

HB 1240 has exemptions for law enforcement and members of the military. Existing owners of black rifles are also grandfathered in — at least for now.

HB 1240 is part of a broader gun reform package signed into law that includes a 10-day waiting period, mandatory firearms training for prospective gun buyers, and a new legal pathway for the attorney general and family members of shooting victims to sue gun makers who market their products to prohibited persons.

These additional provisions take effect this summer.

Rep. Strom Peterson (D-Edmonds), who sponsored House Bill 1240, stated, “Gun violence rips loved ones from their families, devastates our communities, and traumatizes our children again and again.”

“Students everywhere have been speaking up, demanding we do something to protect them,” he continued. “We’ve stepped up to answer them. With the Governor’s signature today, we’re sending a clear message to our kids: we hear you and we are acting to keep you safe.”

Gottlieb also highlighted two ongoing legal actions challenging Washington gun laws, one addressing the magazine ban and another contesting the ban on sales of semi-automatic rifles to young adults.

SEE ALSO: Washington State Democrats Force Partisan ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban Through Senate

SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut called out the authors and supporters of the legislation for their “hysteria” and “false characterization” of the banned firearms as “weapons of war.”

“As we note in our complaint, the firearms that Washington bans as ‘assault weapons’ are, in all respects, ordinary semiautomatic rifles. To the extent they are different from other semiautomatic rifles, their distinguishing features make them safer and easier to use,” observed Kraut.

“But even if they are considered as a separate group of ‘assault weapons,’ they cannot be banned because they are not dangerous and unusual,” he concluded.

Rep. Liz Berry (D-Seattle), who sponsored House Bill 1143, the waiting period measure, commented, “Gun violence is now the leading cause of death for children in our country. As a mom of two little ones and as a person who has lost someone who I love to gun violence, this is devastating to me. It’s simple: these bills will save lives.”

Rep. Berry is wrong. Guns ARE NOT the leading cause of death for children in the U.S., as GunsAmerica recently pointed out. There’s also no hard evidence that waiting periods or black rifle bans or frivolous lawsuits against gun makers will “save lives.”

Let us all hope that SAF prevails in court.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

ATF Director Dettelbach Can’t Define ‘Assault Weapon,’ Wants to Ban Them Anyway by BRIAN JONES

Steve Dettelbach, the Director of the Biden Administration’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), told Congress that he’s “not a firearms expert” during a House Appropriations subcommittee meeting last Tuesday.

Dettelbach was responding to Texas Rep. Jake Ellzey (R) who asked him, “In 15 seconds, would you define an ‘assault weapon’ for me?”

Dettelbach would not define what an “assault weapon” is, despite indicating that he would support a sweeping ban on them.

“I’ll go shorter than that, because honestly, if Congress wishes to take that up, I think Congress would have to do the work,” Dettelbach replied, punting on the question.

“But we would be there to provide technical assistance. I, unlike you, am not a firearms expert to the same extent as you maybe, but we have people at ATF who can talk about velocity of firearms, what damage different kinds of firearms cause… so whatever determination you make would be an informed one,” he added.

Dettelbach’s admission of his own ignorance is nothing new. He unsuccessfully ran for the Attorney General of Ohio in 2018, discussing gun control during campaign events without defining the term even then.

Reactions to Dettelbach’s statements were, understandably, met with incredulity.

Attorney Kostas Moras wrote on Twitter, “He admits he isn’t a firearms expert, and I appreciate that honesty. But then, why is he head of the ATF? Does he know a lot about alcohol or tobacco or something?”

Townhall.com writer Derek Hunter also joked, “’If it looks like anything Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Statham or Willis ever held in a movie it is scary and needs to be banned.’”

Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, agreed, “Joe Biden’s ATF Director just testified in a Congressional hearing that he’s not a firearms expert. Wow. Maybe the ATF shouldn’t be regulating your firearms then.”

Categories
All About Guns Allies Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Gun Fearing Wussies Well I thought it was neat!

GUNS SAVE LIVES WRITTEN BY WILL DABBS, MD

 

The mainstream media is like a dog chasing a squirrel. Talking heads pontificate about the crisis du jour, while public figures rend their clothes while wearing sackcloth and ashes before the klieg lights and cameras. There is something fresh, new, and horrible every single day. It is predictable. That’s a great way to earn clicks but a really bad way to shape government policy.

According to them, our country’s greatest existential crisis is assault weapons. Now we all know that it’s not even possible to define a “semiautomatic assault weapon,” much less control its proliferation and nefarious use via legislative fiat. However, reality has never stopped the Left from throwing ineffective laws at a problem. As it relates to the Second Amendment in general and an assault weapons ban in particular, it behooves us to appreciate a few inconvenient facts.

Everytown for Gun Safety is a rabidly anti-gun political activist organization. Let’s give them the benefit of the doubt and assume their numbers are accurate. Everytown defines a mass shooting as a rampage event wherein four or more people are killed with firearms excluding the shooter. They counted an average of nineteen mass shooter events per annum between 2009 and 2020, with a total of 1,363 fatalities. Of these tragedies spread over 12 years, firearms that could be defined as “assault weapons” were used in 30 shootings, resulting in 347 deaths.

 

Gun banners would have you believe that this is responsible for the
deaths of thousands of innocent Americans. That’s just not true.

 

Ours is a nation of 328 million people. In 2019, 364 Americans were killed with rifles of all sorts. That’s 364 unimaginable tragedies. I do not for a moment trivialize that. However, there is the issue of scale.

In that same year, we lost 480,000 Americans to cigarettes. Of those 480,000, some 41,000 were innocent non-smokers killed by secondhand smoke, mostly children with breathing disorders. That same year, 1,476 Americans were killed with knives, 600 were beaten to death with fists, and 397 died from attackers wielding clubs and hammers (statista.com). More people were murdered with knives in that single year than were killed in mass shootings between 2009 and 2020. People are just bad.

The images are undeniably heartrending. No normal person can gaze upon the pictures of terrified survivors streaming out of a school or shopping center without being viscerally moved. However, isolated images are no basis for sound policy.

As horrible as these diabolical events are in the grand scheme, the cold absolute numbers are still fairly small. By contrast, there is a flip side to the Second Amendment question that is typically completely overlooked in the national discourse. Just how many lives are saved by America’s unique infatuation with these implements of violence?

 

Lots more folks are hurt by thugs wielding unimposing handguns than black rifles.

 

Gunfacts.info estimates that guns are used to prevent crimes some 2.5 million times per year in America. That’s an average of 6,849 incidents every day. The same researchers assert that guns are used to avert a life-threatening crime 400,000 times per year. These numbers are amply footnoted, but statistics are readily manipulatable. I take all those things with a grain of salt. Today, I’d like to think a little bigger.

Our great republic has served as a beacon of freedom and democracy to an oft-enslaved world for some 245 years now. Ours is the most resilient, long-lived, and productive democracy in human history. We are also a gleaming exception. Time after time after time, governments have their day in the sun but then devolve into blood-soaked despotism. That cycle is a lamentable part of the human condition.

Cambodia suffered unimaginably under Pol Pot (2 million dead). Germany had Hitler and the Nazis (21 million dead). China had Mao (45 million dead). And then there’s Putin (pushing half a million dead total).

The real body counts don’t come from mass shooters. The serious body counts come from governments. And the only thing standing between the United States government and something similarly ghastly, as has been the case with democracies throughout human history, is a well-armed populace.

 

If you really want to make a dent in violence then figure out a way to
control the proliferation of these things. Knives are used to kill way more
people in America than scary black rifles.

An armed population is absolutely ungovernable without their consent. Those great wise old guys who drafted the U.S. Constitution knew that to be the case. That’s why the right to own a weapon was enshrined right behind the right to gripe about the government and attend the church of your choice.

I have a dear friend who is alive today because he had a gun on a remote deserted road late at night. The cops were never notified, and the incident never made it into any statistical database. However, I’m sure glad he traveled with a weapon. It’s a scary world.

The American phenomenon is unique in human history. The unhinged rantings of revisionist activists notwithstanding, we have been the greatest force for liberty in the history of the planet. And that could all be gone in a generation. We are not fundamentally different from the Germans, the Cambodians, the Russians, and the Chinese. We simply can’t let short-sighted witless agendas undo two centuries of profound, timeless wisdom.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! Gun Fearing Wussies You have to be kidding, right!?!

HANSON V. DC: “LARGE CAPACITY” MAGAZINE BAN by Carl Bussjaeger

I’ve only been up for a couple of hours (as I begin typing), and the news is already full of stupidity that I’ll need to address. I’ll lead off with a case challenging Washington, DC’s “large capacity” magazine ban, Hanson v. DC. The judge, one Rudolph Contreras, denied a preliminary injunction against the ban. His… reasoning is… remarkable. Or something; I’m trying to be somewhat polite.

A weapon may have some useful purposes in both civilian and military contexts, but if it is most useful in military service, it is not protected by the Second Amendment.
[…]
[Large capacity magazines] are not covered by the [2A] because they are most useful in military service.

Oddly, Contreras cites HELLER in making that point. I can’t find that argument in HELLER, which was largely about whether non- military weapons could be regulated, and how, but there is this.

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M–16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large.

Rather the opposite of Contreras’ weasel-wording, eh? Indeed, HELLER even cites the earlier MILLER, which establishes that militarily-useful arms are protected by the Second Amendment.

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.

Having chucked decades of SCOTUS precedent already, Contreras proceeds to demonstrate an amazing lack of judicial awareness of current events and Supreme Court decisions. Now that he’s established in his own deluded mind that standard capacity magazines are not 2A-protected, he addresses whether this particular restriction of such magazines is permissable.

WARNING: If you’re drinking, swallow before proceeding, for the protection of your screen.

Under this “two-step approach,” a court must “ask first whether a particular provision impinges upon a right protected by the Second Amendment; if it does, then . . . go on to determine whether the provision passes muster under the appropriate level of constitutional scrutiny.

Umm… BRUEN, moron. (All right; “somewhat polite” is off the table after all.) Associate Justice Thomas spent a fair amount of ink taking lower courts to task for continuing to use the two-step approach.

The Court rejects that two-part approach as having one step too many. Step one is broad y consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support a second step that applies means-end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Heller’s methodology centered on constitutional text and history. It did not invoke any means-end test such as strict or intermediate scrutiny, and it expressly rejected any interest-balancing inquiry akin to intermediate scrutiny.</b
[…]
To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest.
[…]
The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

HELLER rejected two-step government interest scrutiny.

MCDONALD rejected two-step government interest scrutiny.

BRUEN rejected two-step government interest scrutiny, and bitch-slapped lower courts for continuing to use it in direct defiance of the Supreme Court.

At this point, I wouldn’t blame Clarence Thomas if he is looking for a 2X4 and Contreras’ home address.