Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

A nicely done rebuttal to the Anti Group

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

California Wins Battle in Ongoing War Against ‘Assault Weapons’ New Golden State registration rules are OK, judge says. Declan McCullagh

Ultraone/Dreamstime.com
Law-abiding Californians’ right to buy and sell AR-15s and other popular semi-automatic rifles shrank this week after a judge upheld state rules targeting “assault weapons.”
The National Rifle Association’s state affiliate had challenged rules, set to take effect on July 1, that expand the existing definition of “assault weapon” to include centerfire rifles with “bullet buttons,” plus a slew of handguns and shotguns. Those rules, the group’s lawsuit argued, extend far beyond what a 2016 state law authorized.
“The legislature has found and declared that the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of the citizenry of California,” Superior Court Judge Mark Snauffer, a Democratic appointee in Fresno, wrote in an little-noticed opinion published Wednesday. “The challenged regulations appear to carry out the intention of the legislature.”

Snauffer’s decision underscores how hostile to gun owners the California judiciary has become. Just as the state is trying to nullify federal marijuana and immigration laws, it’s also trying to effectively nullify the federal Second Amendment. And unless the U.S. Supreme Court steps in, California’s anti-gun politicians and bureaucrats might get away with it.
“We’re disappointed but not surprised,” says Sean Brady, an attorney at Michel & Associates who represents the California Rifle and Pistol Association in the case, known as Villanueva v. Becerra. “These complex technical cases are usually challenging, particularly when you’re up against the state.”
The technical question arises from a fairly straightforward law. In 2016, the California legislature expanded the definition of so-called assault weapons to sweep in ones outfitted with a bullet button. A bullet button is a quick release system that allows magazines to be swapped in and out by using a bullet tip as a tool. The goal of the law was to restrict removable magazines.
But the state Department of Justice seems to be targeting more firearms—and requiring their registration by July 1 upon pain of criminal penalties—than the law actually authorizes. The plaintiffs argue, convincingly, that the department “has promulgated and is currently enforcing a whole host of regulations that go far beyond the registration process without adhering to the [Administrative Procedure Act’s] requirements.”
For instance, the regulations reclassify certain shotguns as assault weapons (assault shotguns?), move up the deadline for obtaining a serial number for 3D-printed or homemade firearms, and limit the definition of “family member” for joint registrations of affected firearms.
Under California law, probably the most Draconian in the country, so-called assault weapons are heavily restricted. They cannot be rented at gun ranges. They cannot be inherited. They cannot be sold to another California resident. They cannot be imported. And owning one is a crime unless it’s registered with the government. Officials appear to hope that the number of Californians with fully functional AR-15s or equivalents will keep shrinking and eventually, with time, drop to zero.
In addition to this administrative challenge to the 2016 Assault Weapons Control Act, the California Rifle and Pistol Association filed a constitutional challenge invoking the Second Amendment. It had no more success. U.S. District Judge Josephine Staton, an Obama appointee, sided with the state a few weeks ago, saying: “Even an outright ban on certain types of semiautomatic weapons does not substantially burden the Second Amendment right.”
A third lawsuit challenging the Assault Weapons Control Act on both constitutional and administrative grounds has been on hold since it was filed in November. Plaintiffs in this case, Holt v. Becerra, include the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Firearms Policy Foundation, the Calguns Foundation, and the Second Amendment Foundation.
“We’re very disappointed in what I think is a very wrong ruling by the court in Fresno,” says Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition. “We’re reviewing it and reviewing options. We’ll do the best we can to give gun owners a fighting chance.”
Given the political leanings of much of the California judiciary, that’s unlikely to happen anytime soon. Instead, this week’s decision will embolden government officials working diligently to turn the Golden State into a Second Amendment–free zone.

Photo Credit: Ultraone/Dreamstime.com

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Well I thought it was funny, Enjoy!

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Some very scary math

The Mathematics of Countering Tyranny

Introductory Proviso: The following essay on possible gun confiscation is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. Nothing herein is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.

THE COLLECTIVIST DREAM

The current mass media-driven “debate” on firearms (actually more like paternalistic lecturing or chiding) seems to be leading toward greater restrictions by Congress. The collectivist gun grabbers have the dream of ignoring the Second Amendment and somehow magically removing all detachable magazine semi-auto rifles from civilian hands. But it is just that: a dream. If they think that they can disarm us, then they are thoroughly deluded.  I’ll explain why, with some simple mathematics.
The United States has the world’s first or second most heavily-armed populace, per capita. (It’s possibly second only to Yemen.) The number of FBI firearms background checks for transfers by Federally-licensed dealers from November 1998 to April 30, 2018 totaled 287,807,015. That isn’t all new guns. It of course includes many second-hand sales that cycled back through FFL holders. But it is still a staggering number. And it does not include any private party (“not through a dealer”) sales of used guns. That is thankfully legal in most states. Nor does it include guns that are legally made at home. (Typically made with 80% complete receivers.) Those home “builds” are becoming quite popular. Their ownership is mostly opaque to any would-be tyrants who might covet seizing them.
There are somewhere between 370 million and 420 million privately-owned firearms in the United States. Let’s just call it 400 million for a nice round figure. Most of those guns are not registered to particular owners. That is why there are only rough estimates. It makes me feel good to know that Big Brother has no idea where those guns are, and who owns them. When I last checked, the total U.S. population is 327,708,500.  So that is about 1.2 guns per person. The adult population is around 249,500,000. And according to Wikipedia, the “Fit for service” Military Age Male population (men, ages 16-49) of the U.S. is just 59,764,677. That equates to 6.6 guns per Military Age Male in the United States.
Of the 400 million American guns, roughly 20% are single-shot or double-barreled, 60% are manually-operated repeaters (e.g., bolt action, lever action, pump action, or revolvers), and 20% are semi-automatic. There are only about 175,000 transferable Federally-registered full autos. That number would have been much larger by now but production was sharply curtailed by a hefty $200 tax (starting in 1934) and then there numbers were effectively frozen in 1986. It is noteworthy that if it were not for the National Firearms Act of 1934, selective fire guns would by now be in what the Heller decision calls “common use“. After all, it costs only a few dollars more to manufacture a selective-fire M16 than a semiautomatic-only AR-15.
With every passing year, the predominance of semi-autos is gaining for both rifles and handguns. (In sheer numbers produced, revolvers are becoming almost passé.) The biggest-selling handgun in the country is the Smith & Wesson M&P 9mm, followed closely by the Glock Model 19 9mm. Gaining rapidly is the highly modular SIG P320, which was recently adopted by the U.S. Army. All three of these are semi-automatic. Standard magazine sizes for autopistols range from 13 to 20 rounds. And the most popular rifles of the decade are AR-15s and their clones. Their standard capacity magazines hold 30 cartridges. (That isn’t “high capacity”.)

THE MATH ON AR CLONES

AR-15 and AR-10 variants are truly generic and have been sold under more than 120 brand names. The number of ARs (AR-15s, M4s, AR-10s, and variants) sold from 2000 to 2014 was approximately 5,672,900. Since then, AR-15 clones have become even more popular and ubiquitous with approximately 1.2 million more produced in 2015, 1.6 million in 2016, and 1.5 million in 2017. At least 1.2 million will be produced in 2018. It can be assumed that 99% of the ARs produced since the year 2000 are still functional. There were more than 2.3 million other ARs produced for the civilian market between 1962 and 1999. It is safe to assume that at least 95% of those of that vintage are still functional. So the total number of functional ARs in private hands in the U.S. is somewhere around 11 to 12 million. (As of May, 2018.)

SOME MATH ON OTHER SEMI-AUTOS

Next we come to the more fuzzy math on the wide variety of other models of semi-auto centerfire rifles in private hands. They include detachable magazine, en bloc clip, and stripper clip-fed designs. Here are some rough estimates. (Some of these estimates are based on my own observations of the ratios of different models I’ve seen offered for sale):

  • Various semi-auto hunting rifles (Remington 740/7400 series, AK Hunter, Browning BAR, Winchester 100, Valmet Hunter, Saiga Hunter, HK SL7/SL8, HK 630/770, et cetera): 2 million+
  • Ruger Mini-14 and Mini-30: 1.2 million
  • M1 Garand: 800,000+ (With many more being imported, soon.)
  • AK Variants (imported and domestically made, from all makers including Valmet and Galil): 2 to 3 million
  • M1 Carbine: 1.5 to 2 million
  • AR-180 and AR-180B: 35,000
  • M1A and other semi-auto M14 variants: 360,000
  • SIG 550 series: 80,000+
  • Thompson Semi-Autos (West Hurley and Kahr Arms): 75,000
  • HK variants: CETME, HK91/93/94 series, PTR91, etc.: 600,000 to 700,000
  • FAL variants: FN-FAL, FNC, and L1A1:  425,000
  • SKS variants: 1 million
  • Steyr AUG: 110,000
  • IWI Tavor & X95: 70,000
  • Various semi-autos assembled from military surplus full auto parts sets (M1919, BAR, Sten, M2 Browning, M3, Etc.): 75,000+
  • Assorted Other Models (These include: Kel-Tec, Barrett, Leader, FAMAS, Uzi carbines, Wilkinson, Feather, Calico, Hi-Point, SIG AMT, SIG PE57, SIG MCX, SIG MPX, Johnson, BM59, HK USC, TNW, Demro Tac-1, Calico Carbine, ACR, SCAR, Chiappa Carbine, SWD (MAC), Robinson, Hakim, Ljungman, Beretta AR-70, Beretta CX4, CZ Scorpion, Kriss Carbine, FN-49, SVT-40, SVD, PSL, Gewehr 41 & 43, Daewoo, FS 2000, Ruger PCR, Marlin Camp Carbine, et cetera): 2+ million.
THE AGGREGATE GUN MATH
Totaling the list above and adding it to the preceding estimate on ARs, there are 20 million semi-auto centerfire rifles that are in civilian hands here in the States. And that number is increasing by nearly 2 million per year. (More than half of which are AR-15 or AR-10 clones.) Again looking at the Military Age Male  population (men, ages 16-49) of 59,764,677, that equates to roughly one semi-auto rifle for every three Military Age Males.

 
If a production and importation ban requiring registration were enacted, there would surely be massive noncompliance. For example, the registration schemes enacted in the past two decades in Australia, Canada, The Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil, and the States of California and New York have been well-documented failures. They have been met with noncompliance rates ranging from 50% to 90%.

Even with an optimistic 50% registration compliance rate, that would mean only 10 million of the nation’s 20 million semi-auto rifles would have a current name and address attached, to allow eventual gun confiscation.

 
Let us surmise that following several years of a registration scheme there were an outright “turn them all in, Mr. and Mrs. America” ban. I predict that even if $1,000 per gun were offered, no more than 11 million would be turned in, by compliant and history-ignorant Sheeple. (An aside: They’ll probably call this a “Buy Back”, but that will be a lie. They can’t “buy back” something that they’ve never owned.)

But that would still leave at least 9 million in circulation, as contraband.
THE SWAT AND ATF MANPOWER MATH
So let’s suppose that a full Federal semi-auto rifle ban were enacted with a gun confiscation order issued.
This is where the math gets very interesting: There are only 902,000 sworn police officers in the United States. At most, about 80,000 of them have had SWAT training. There are only 5,113 BATFE employees–and many of those are mere paper shufflers. As of 2017, there were just 2,623 ATF Special Agents. The FBI’s notorious Hostage Rescue Team (HRT or “Hurt Team”) has a cadre strength that is classified but presumably less than 200 agents. Together, they comprise the pool of “Door Kickers” that might be available to execute unconstitutional search warrants.
If they were to start going door-to-door executing warrants for unconstitutional gun confiscation, what would the casualty rates be for the ATF, HRT, and the assorted local SWAT teams?  It bears mention that the military would be mostly out of the picture, since they are banned from domestic law enforcement roles, under the Posse Comitatus Act.

THE DIVISION EQUATIONS

Next, let’s do some addition and then divide:

80,000    SWAT-trained police
+ 2,623     ATF Special Agents
+    200     FBI HRT Members
=  82,863    Potentially Available Door Kickers
… presumably working in teams of 8, attempting to seize 9,000,000 newly-contraband semi-auto rifles.
Before we finish the math, I’ll state some “for the sake of argument” assumptions:

  1. That every SWAT-trained officer in the country is pressed into service.
  2. That there would be no “false positives”–meaning that 100% of the tips leading to raids were accurate. (Unlikely)
  3. That no local police departments would opt out of serving unconstitutional Federal gun warrants. (Unlikely)
  4. That all raids would be successful. (Unlikely)
  5. That each successful raid would net an average of three contraband semi-auto rifles. (Possible)
  6. That every Door Kicker would get an equal share in the work. (Very unlikely)
  7. That every Door Kicker would be alive and well through the entire campaign of terror–with no incapacitating injuries or deaths of SWAT officers, no refusals, no resignations, and no early retirements. (Very unlikely)

A lot of those are not safe assumptions. But for the sake of completing a gedankenexperiment, let’s pen this out on the back of a napkin, as a “best case” for an unconstitutional gun confiscation campaign. Here are the division equations:
9,000,000 ÷ 82,863 = 108 (x 8 officers per team) =  864 raids, per officer 
Let that sink in: Every officer would have to survive 864 gun-grabbing raids.
Those of course are fanciful numbers. There will be a lot of false tips, and there will be many owners who keep their guns very well-hidden. Each of those raids would have nearly the same high level of risk but yet many of them would net zero guns. And it is likely that many police departments will wisely decline involvement. Therefore the “best case” figure of 864 raids per officer is quite low. The real number would be much higher.

How long would it be until mounting law enforcement casualties triggered a revolt or “sick-out” among the rank and file Door Kickers?  For some historical context: Just four ATF agents were killed and 16 wounded in the Waco raid, and that was considered quite “devastating” and “traumatizing” to the 5,000-member agency.

 
Here is some sobering ground truth: America’s gun owners are just as well trained–and often better trained–than the police. There are 20.4 million American military veterans, and the majority of veterans own guns.

RESISTANCE STRATEGY AND TACTICS
Rather than meeting the police one-at-a-time on their doorsteps, I predict that resisting gun owners will employ guerilla warfare strategy and tactics to foil the plans of the gun grabbers:
1.) They will successfully hide the majority of their banned guns. This is just what many Europeans did, following World War II. There are perhaps a million guns in Europe that were never registered or turned in, after the war. Particularly in Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, Spain, and Greece, there is still massive noncompliance. It has now been 73 years since the end of WWII. So the gun registration noncompliance in Europe is now multi-generational.
2.) They will form small, fully independent “phantom” resistance cells. This is commonly called leaderless resistance. Such cells are very difficult to detect or penetrate. These resistance cells will carefully choose the time and location of their attacks, to their advantage.
3.) They will individually target the legislators who voted for unconstitutional gun ban legislation. This will make it  almost suicidal for these legislators to return to their home districts.
4.) They will individually target any outspokenly anti-gun police chiefs.
5.) They will target all BATF agents and FBI HRT agents–first with intimidation, and then with targeted killings.
6.) They will pillage or burn down the facilities where confiscated guns are being stored and destroyed.
7.) They will anonymously phone in false police reports about gun control advocates. (This is commonly called “SWATing.”)
8.) They will use time-delayed explosives, time-delayed incendiaries, time-delayed bursting toxin containers, cell phone-triggered IEDs, computer program worms and viruses, and long-range standoff weapons to minimize the risk of being detected, apprehended, or killed. Likely targets will be Federal buildings, courthouses, SWAT training facilities, police training ranges, and especially the private residences of anyone deemed to be a gun-grabber.
9.) They will use anonymous re-mailers and VPN to encourage others to resist by forming their own leaderless resistance cells.
10.) They will begin a War of Attrition on the Door Kickers, with tactics such as these:
  A.) Ambushing SWAT vehicles while in transit, rather than waiting for the SWAT teams to set up raids.
  B.) Ambushing individual SWAT team members at unexpected times and places–most likely at their homes.
  C.) Sabotaging SWAT vehicles, most likely with time-delayed incendiaries.
  D.) Targeting SWAT teams or individual team members while they are at home, in training, or when attending conventions.
  E.) Harassing and intimidating individual SWAT team members and their families. The systematic burning of their privately-owned vehicles and their unoccupied homes and vacation cabins will be unmistakable threats.
11.) They will individually target “gun control” advocates, organizers, and group leaders.
12.) They will individually target the judges that issue gun seizure warrants.
13.) They will individually target journalists who have vocally advocated civilian disarmament.
14.) Some owners of M1 Carbines, AR-15s and HKs in the resistance movement will convert them to selective fire. (They will assume: “Well, if it is now a felony to possess a semi-auto, then what is the harm in making it a full auto?”)
15.) They will be willing to wage an ongoing guerilla warfare campaign using both passive and active resistance until the collectivists relent. This would be something like “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland, but on a larger scale, with greater ferocity, and with far more weapons readily available. Unlike the IRA, which had to import arms, all of the the firearms, magazines, and ammunition needed for any American resistance movement are already in situ. It is noteworthy that the agreed “Decommissioning” the Irish Republican Army (IRA) was delayed for more than five years because of their remaining caches of arms, which by then included only around 1,000 battle rifles!)
THE GUN CONFISCATION END GAME
I believe that once it was started, the whole affray would be settled within just a few weeks or months.American gun owners clearly have the numbers on their side. Once the shooting starts, the gun-hating politicians will quickly feel isolated, vastly outnumbered, and incredibly vulnerable. And when they realize they’ve lost their Door Kicker shock troops, they will capitulate. After some horrendous casualties in a brief but fierce civil war, the politicians would be forced to:
  1. Declare a cease fire and stand-down for all gun confiscation raiders.
  2. Repeal all Federal gun laws.
  3. Order the destruction of all Federal import, purchase, transfer, and registration records
  4. Issue unconditional pardons for all convicted Federal gun law violators.
  5. Declare a general amnesty for all involved in the resistance, and drop all pending charges.
  6. Disband the BATFE.

Without all six of those, the hostilities would continue.

BUT THERE’S MORE
The foregoing math on the roughly 20 million semi-auto rifles is not the full extent of the problem for the gun grabbers. Additionally, there are at least 50 million centerfire handguns that would be suitable for resistance warfare. (And another 3 million being made or imported each year.) There are also perhaps 40 million scoped centerfire deer rifles in private hands. The vast majority of those have no traceable paper trail. Fully capable of 500+ yard engagement, these rifles could be employed to out-range the tyrants and their minions.

 
Then there are the estimated 1.5 million unregistered machineguns now in the country.  Except for a 30-day amnesty in 1968 that generated only about 65,000 registrations, they have been contraband since 1934. Their number is particularly difficult to accurately estimate, since some semi-autos such as the M1 Carbine, HK91/93/94 series, and AR-15 are fairly easy to convert to selective fire. Similarly, nearly all “open bolt” semi-auto designs are easy to convert to full auto. Large numbers of conversion parts sets have been sold, with little recordkeeping. Some guns can be converted simply by removing sear springs or filing their sears. Just a trickle of unregistered full autos are seized or surrendered each year. This begs the question: If Federal officials have been unable to round up un-papered machineguns after 84 years, then how do they expect to ever confiscate semi-autos, which are 15 times more commonplace?
As evidenced by the 1990s wars in the Balkans, when times get inimical, contraband guns get pulled out of walls and put into use. We can expect to see the same, here.
Now, to get back to the simple mathematics, here are some ratios to ponder:

  • NRA members (5.2 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 63-to-1 ratio
  • Military veterans (20.4 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 249-to-1 ratio
  • Unregistered machineguns (1.5 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 18-to-1 ratio
  • Privately owned semi-auto rifles (40 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 485-to-1 ratio
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
The mathematics that I’ve cited don’t bode well for the gun-grabbing collectivists. If they ever foolishly attempt to confiscate semi-auto rifles, then it will be “Game On” for Civil War 2. I can foresee that they would run out of willing Door Kickers, very quickly.

I’ll conclude with a word of caution: Leftist American politicians should be careful about what they wish for. Those who hate the 2nd Amendment and scheme to disarm us have no clue about the unintended consequences of their plans. If they proceed, then I can foresee that it will end very badly for them. – JWR
End Notes:
Again, the preceding is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. None of the foregoing is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.
Permission to reprint, re-post or forward this article in full is granted, but only if credit is given to James Wesley, Rawles and first publication in SurvivalBlog (with a link.) It must not be edited or excerpted, and all included links must be left intact.

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Dear Grumpy Advice on Teaching in Today's Classroom

Bet you did not know this!

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops

TSA

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Mainstream Media’s War on Guns Marches On

Gun ConfiscationGun Confiscation
U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)-The war on guns marches on. Instead of concentrating on real solutions like getting rid of “gun free zones,” focusing on mental health, and allowing teachers to carry guns the mainstream media pushes “common sense” gun laws. These proposed laws are anything but common sense.

Texas shooting suspect’s choice of guns complicates debate over assault rifles,” reads the headlines in the Chicago Tribune.

The Texas shooter used a revolver and a shotgun to kill ten students. The Chicago Tribune article highlights that only the most extreme gun grabbers want to ban shotguns and revolvers. At least publicly. The article quickly points to the Las Vegas and the Parkland shootings to show more people died there.

“The reason most mass shootings are conducted with assault weapons is that shooters know full well what weapon to select, if they want to kill the most amount of people in the shortest amount of time possible, and that’s an AR-15-style gun with a large-capacity magazine,” the article quotes Avery W. Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “If this shooter had had one of those, quite likely there would have been more deaths and injuries. But we don’t know.”

Gardiner is living in a world of hypotheticals. This tactic is one of the most commonly used techniques by the left. When a tragedy happens that proves your theory wrong, instead of accepting the evidence and reevaluating your theory, you change the reality by using hypotheticals. “It was bad, but it could have been really bad.”
Michael E. Diamond of NBC News calls gun culture a “dysfunctional mess.” They know the respect veterans have in the gun world, so they wheel out a vet who is anti-gun. They do this for two reasons. First, being in the military, the vet speaks from a place of authority even though this vet admits he really didn’t use a gun in the military.
The Second reason is that they want to try to frame it that every veteran agrees with the one outlier. Just look at the headline “The Texas school shooting reminds America what vets already know: civilian gun culture is a dysfunctional mess
He encourages people not to listen to the NRA or other pro-gun groups. Instead, he wants people to look to vets. I would be willing to bet that most vets do not agree with Diamond. So, what he really means is that he wants people to listen to him.

He starts by pointing out that most soldiers are unarmed. He uses this fact to push that most people should be unarmed. He says that only MPs are armed on base. He points out that professional soldiers get extensive training with firearms. He suggests that civilians should be required to get the same amount of training as the military. Also, he says that the military tracks their ammunition and firearms. I track my guns as well. Most gun owners do.
His great solutions are to impose military-style regulations on civilian populations. Without saying as much, that would mean a gun confiscation for everyone besides the police. He finishes the article by reminding people that he fought for our country in Desert Storm (even though he didn’t see combat) so we should listen to him.
The Atlantic runs the headline, “It’s the Guns.” Right away you know where this story is going.
What “The Atlantic” does is throws various misleading stats from anti-gun groups at the reader in hopes that they don’t actually look into them. Anytime you see statistics you have to take them with a grain of salt.
I once had a professor who told that class that you can use statistics to prove anything you want. He took the same study and framed the stats in two different ways. The results were polar opposites. This “statical jiu-jitsu” is what David Frum of The Atlantic is doing.
The United States is a big country. We have over 300 million people. That is a hell of a lot more people than most countries in Europe. This fact alone means that you can’t use raw numbers. You have to use per capita numbers. According to the Crime Research Prevention Center, you are 27% more likely to be killed in a mass shooting in the EU than in the US, but that doesn’t fit Frum’s narrative.
He then goes on to attack gun owners. He calls us irresponsible. He points out that most gun owners don’t feel the need to inform visitors that there are guns in the house. “Hey come in! By the way, I have an AR15 and a Glock in a safe downstairs.”
Then there is an article in “Deadline” attacking movie posters. The author, Michael Cieply, thinks that Han Solo holding a blaster on a Star Wars poster is damaging to our kids. Yes, a blaster from Star Wars could be making our kids the next mass shooter.

He claims Chewbacca has the space equivalent of an assault rifle. He goes after other movies posters as well. For example, the hilarious poster from Deadpool 2″. That poster shows a cartoon Deadpool riding a unicorn with a gun.
 
Adam Swiderski, of Syfy, writes that he is very anti-censorship, but he thinks that the movie industry should look at their movies and tone down the guns. Yes, in one breath he says he is anti-censorship then in the next asserts that the entertainment industry should censor itself.
The most ridiculous article I ran across was one from Jill Lawrence of “The USA Today.”
The headline reads, “Would the Founders want our kids to die in school shootings like Santa Fe? I doubt it.
She says that the Founding Fathers were unbound by the past and wouldn’t let something like that pesky Second Amendment get in their way. She claims since a lot of the signers of the Constitution had children that died that they would support gun control. Later she claims that The Second Amendment was put in place to control slaves.

“Does anyone think they would expect us to live by a 230-year-old document,” She asks referring to the Constitution.

My response would be an astounding “Yes!”
I do believe the Constitution should bind us. That 230-year-old document is the bedrock of our country. It stops people like Jill Lawrence from trampling on our rights. If the founding fathers were alive today, they wouldn’t change a damn thing in that Masterpiece.


About John CrumpJohn Crump
John is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on the history of the patriot movement and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss or at www.crumpy.com.

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

The Enemy of the People

https://youtu.be/a76JMYH6KvQ

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Why am I NOt surprised by this?

Ron Paul: Republicans, Democrats Teaming Up for Federal Gun Confiscation Bill

A source inside the US Senate has reported that Republicans and Democrats are teaming up and using the recent tragedy in Texas as the impetus to push through a massive federal gun control bill.

gun
In an email Tuesday night, former Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul released an ominous statement claiming that a source they have in the Senate revealed Democrats are teaming up with Republicans to push through a massive gun control bill.

According to their source, as Paul explained, “Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) are teaming up with Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to ram through one of the worst nationwide gun confiscation schemes ever devised.”

The gun confiscation bill, according to Paul, is designed to disarm Americans without any due process. The senators are using the recent tragic shooting in Texas as the impetus behind the law—in spite of the fact that this law would not have prevented the shooting at all.
As the Free Thought Project has previously reported, some states have already begun implementing laws like this one. Using mass shootings as a their ammunition, states have enacted “Red Flag” or “Risk Protection” laws which allow police to confiscate a person’s weapon before they are ever given a chance to defend themselves.
In both of the gun confiscation cases reported by TFTP, neither of the two men were suspected of committing a crime, nor had they committed a crime.
Under the fifth and fourteenth amendments, due process clauses are in place to act as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law. What’s more, neither of the men were granted their sixth amendment rights to be confronted with the witnesses against them. In both cases, simple orders—under new laws—were issued, arguably arbitrarily, which stripped these two men of their property.
In spite of what officials and the media claim, when a person is stripped of their constitutional rights, albeit temporarily, without being given the chance to make their own case based on what can be entirely arbitrary accusations, this is the removal of due process.
As Ron Paul explains, this removal of due process could soon be a federal law.

Under so-called “Red Flag” or “Risk Protection” Orders, anti-gun family members, neighbors, or associates could have your guns taken away based on mere accusations without any real due process or trial.
In secret court proceedings, where only your accuser is present, judges could determine that you pose a “significant danger” to someone, including yourself.
Imagine your surprise when a heavily armed SWAT Team arrives to seize your lawfully owned firearms.
It would then cost you tens of thousands of dollars in court costs and weeks or even months to try and convince the court they made a mistake.

To be clear, no one here is advocating for people determined to be mentally unfit to be able to possess firearms. However, they need to be determined to be mentally unfit before they lose their rights.

To those who may be in favor of such laws, consider the following: There is no way to stop an estranged spouse from calling police repeatedly and telling them their ex is threatening to cause harm to others. While the man in Florida had his guns taken for being psychologically unfit, the man in Seattle simply open-carried a pistol and looked out of windows and his guns were taken because his neighbors thought it was strange.
Anyone, any time, now has the ability to claim someone else is a threat and have police take their guns. One does not need to delve into the multiple ‘what if’ scenarios to see what sort of ominous implications arise from such a practice. What’s more, police in some states now have the power to deem you a threat at any time and legally disarm you—due process be damned.
This is the exact scenario that Donald Trump advocated for in February.

NBC News

@NBCNews

WATCH: President Trump: “I like taking the guns early … Take the guns first, go through due process second.”

As Ron Paul explains, this is entirely unconstitutional.

The words of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution are so easy to grasp:
“. . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There were no asterisks and no footnotes. There are no sentences that follow which start with the words “unless” or “however.” The right to defend your life and property shall not be infringed by the government.
Period.

Paul’s Campaign for Liberty has set up the Defend the Second Amendment Directive where citizens can sign a petition to demand their Senator not pass this blow to freedom and self-defense. You can sign it here.
Please share this article to let your friends and family that saying, “they are coming for our guns,” is not a conspiracy theory.

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Well I thought it was funny!

Poor Max, Folks are always picking on her!