Category Archives: Constitutional Freedoms
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
. A severe blow for the freedom of speech, and victory for the advance of Sharia blasphemy laws here. “Michigan Federal Judge Allows Muslim Violence to Suppress Christian Speech; Immediate Appeal Filed,” from the American Freedom Law Center, May 14:
A Michigan federal judge today dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought by several Christian evangelists who were violently assaulted by a hostile Muslim mob while preaching at an Arab festival last year in Dearborn, Michigan, which has the largest Muslim population in the United States. Video of the Muslim assault went viral on YouTube.
The American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed the lawsuit against Wayne County, the Wayne County Sheriff, and two Wayne County Deputy Chiefs for refusing to protect the Christians from the attack and threatening to arrest the Christians for disorderly conduct if they did not halt their speech activity and immediately leave the festival area.
Judge Patrick J. Duggan, sitting in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, granted Wayne County’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the lawsuit. The judge also denied AFLC’s motion requesting that the court issue an order preventing the Wayne County Sheriff and his deputies from restricting the Christian evangelists from displaying their banners and signs on the public sidewalks outside of this year’s Arab Festival, which will be held in June. In the ruling, the judge stated the following: “The Court finds that the actual demonstration of violence here provided the requisite justification for [the Wayne County sheriffs’] intervention, even if the officials acted as they did because of the effect the speech had on the crowd.”
Robert Muise, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel, commented: “The First Amendment was dealt a severe blow today as a result of this ruling. Indeed, this ruling effectively empowers Muslims to silence Christian speech that they deem offensive by engaging in violence. And pursuant to this ruling, the Christian speakers are now subject to arrest for engaging in disorderly conduct on account of the Muslim hecklers’ violent response to their speech. In short, this ruling turns the First Amendment on its head.”
David Yerushalmi, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel, added: “This fight for our fundamental right to freedom of speech does not stop here. We have filed an immediate appeal of this ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. While Judge Duggan may have been the first judge to rule on this issue, he won’t be the last. Indeed, we are prepared to take this case to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary because it is imperative that our free speech rights not be subject to mob rule. This is the United States, not Benghazi.”
At least for now.
Hazards, moral and other
Herschel tells our militarized “police” personnel a thing or two about a thing or two.
Hey moron. When there is a child around, get your hand off of your damn weapon. I don’t care about your trigger discipline. When you unholster your weapon I don’t know what you will do. I have a child in my arms. Moron. Learn to use your brain.
There are many, many more such examples, and I’m not sure what the SWAT officer was talking about when he discussed the jubilation America displayed when Boston was locked down like a prison, but around these parts we were livid. We don’t want you. We don’t need you. We don’t see you in heroic terms. We think you’re dangerous and a hazard to the peaceable among us.
Finally, you have no moral right to unholster your weapon and point it at me, my family or my beasts. You don’t have a moral right to forcibly enter my home, and you don’t have a moral right to endanger me, my family or my beasts because you want to “go home at the end of the day.”
Oh, and by the way. I think your reflexive shooting of dogs during your stupid SWAT raids is cowardly and ham-handed (it happens all over America every day). If a dog comes after you when you force your way into a home, maybe you shouldn’t have been in that home in the first place. And most of the time if you can’t handle dogs without reverting to shooting them I think you’re a pussy.
All just part and parcel of keeping a population cowed, ignorant, and suppressed.
From COld Fury: http://coldfury.com/
Found at Wirecutter: http://ogdaa.blogspot.com/
Subject: Senate Gun Control Bill
Read this very carefully….
The “most popular” part of the proposed Senate gun control bill (background checks) sounds like a good idea at first but is more restrictive than anyone anticipated and will have significant unintended consequences.
There is a huge push to get it through Congress before the public has a chance to consider its contents.
Common activities that we take for granted will become federal crimes. These are not irresponsible exaggerations. Please take a moment to review the requirements of the bill.
Here are a few examples of the restrictions in the bill:
EXAMPLE #1 Loaning your buddy a shotgun for a duck hunting trip will be considered a transfer. If the following requirements are not met, YOU HAVE BOTH COMMITTED A FEDERAL CRIME.
1. He must have already purchased his hunting license 2. Season is already open (and will not close before he returns it) 3. He cannot travel with the firearm through a county where season is not yet open or any area where hunting is prohibited and certainly not across a state line.
He CANNOT stop by your house on the day before season opens, pick up the shot gun, go to the sporting goods store to buy a license and shells then drive out to the hunting lease. In this scenario, YOU BOTH WOULD HAVE COMMITTED MULTIPLE FEDERAL CRIMES, YOUR WEAPONS WILL BE FORFEITED AND YOU WILL LOOSE YOUR RIGHT TO BUY OR OWN A FIREARM.
EXAMPLE #2 It appears that only you may relocate your weapons. If your weapon leaves your home without you, the new legislation considers it a transfer of possession. ALL transfers require going through a firearms dealer, paying the transfer fee and a background check for the transferee.
Putting the weapon, even temporarily in someone else’s possession, requires a transfer through a dealer. There is no exception for putting them in a friend’s truck while moving to your new house or packing them unloaded, locked in a gunsafe into a moving truck.
Any scenario in which your weapon leaves your home without you is considered a transfer. Failure to properly transfer the weapon is a federal crime which can result in a prison term AND WILL RESULT IN THE FORFEITURE OF YOUR WEAPON.
In the scenario above, your buddy’s truck was used to commit a federal crime and WILL BE CONFISCATED just like with current Fish and Game violations.
Infractions as above which involve 2 guns of any type are considered weapons trafficking. You will be prosecuted under the same federal laws as a terrorist arms dealer.
Any of the infractions above (or hundreds of other routine scenarios) may result in federal charges, confiscation of ALL your weapons and being prohibited, like all felons, from ever owning a weapon again.
Please read the text of the bill yourself. Most of it is boring legalese but the sections on transfers and trafficking are critical.
Take a minute to think about all the routine activities like those above that will make you a federal criminal and result in prison time plus the confiscation of your weapons and other property.
A link to the bill is included below on the official Senate website. See Section 122 “Firearms Transfers”.
Read it and call your congressman’s office. Talk to their staff. Tell them how you feel about this.
Keep in mind, none of the above would have stopped the tragedy’s in Columbine or Newtown. The proposed law makes you a criminal and opens the door for confiscation of your weapons and property for otherwise routine activities.
Think and act. Congress is hoping that you will do neither.
If you found the patience to read the entire text, you also learned that exactly $100 million per year of your tax money is set aside to enforce these restrictions.
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Found at The Daley Gator
PUSH BACK! Kansas, Missouri respond to Eric Holder Threat
Not backing down. Will Texas join them on Saturday too?
In response to Eric Holder’s threat against Kansas for its new gun control nullification bill, there have already been two official responses from Kansas. Plus the Missouri legislatureprovided some needed backup too.
1. Kansas Secretary of State Kobach responds, draws a line in the sand.
“With respect to his concern that federal officials be allowed to enforce federal laws, Mr. Holder’s statement is a curious one. He was evidently not concerned that ATFE officials be allowed to enforce federal law when his agency oversaw the “fast and furious” operation to walk guns into the hands of Mexican cartels.”
READ IT HERE: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/kobach
2. Kansas Governor Sam Brownback responds, not backing down
Thanks Holder for his opinion, asserts the authority of the people. ”The people of Kansas have clearly expressed their sovereign will.”
READ IT HERE: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/brownback
3. Missouri legislature backs them up. A day after Holder’s threat, the Missouri Senate passed their version of the 2nd amendment Preservation Act by a veto-proof majority – effectively thumbing their nose at the AG.
READ IT HERE: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/missouriHB436
4. Will Texas join in? On Saturday, the Texas House will vote on HB928, a bill that would make most federal gun control measures “nearly impossible to enforce.”
DETAILS HERE: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/texasHB928
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Revolution and Rebellion Explained by T.L. Davis. The Government Has Rebelled Against The Constitution.
In order to brand any of us as revolutionaries, they must first admit that they have abandoned the Constitution. To do that would be to de-legitimize their own offices. They can’t do it.
So, they try to squeak out a little latitude by calling us domestic insurgents, or domestic terrorists without defining what is that we are against, which would be tyranny. Are they in favor of it? We are against oppression. Are they in favor of it?
We are for the Constitution and for respecting the rights recognized by it. We can’t be against the government if we are in favor of its charter. We can be against the government where it has distanced itself from its charter.
What ground have they chosen by making us their enemy? They have chosen the ground of a government estranged from its charter; disrespecting of the rights of the citizenry. They have chosen the ground of the Temple, Texas police department willing to arrest a veteran at the whim of mob rule.
The battle lines are drawn. We have to encourage them to correct their ways; to honor the Constitution. Their distance from legal action has caused the backlash they detest. They don’t want to hear from the Tea Party, the Patriot/Liberty Movement or the militias, because we remind them that they are acting illegally; that their actions are illegitimate.
All of this has been written before, but today it is with a different heart.
Their revolution has taken place over the past one hundred and fifty years. Slowly they have crept in inch by coercive inch: taking a little bit of liberty here, adding a little bit of socialism there. Insinuating the state into our lives a morsel at a time. “It is for the best” they say as they do a little more evil.
The true nature of the republican state is to find a balance of liberty that provides the greatest liberty to all. This simple principle has been abused to mean all liberty is at the mercy of the comfort of the most. Those are two completely different principles.
Once the concept of “societal good” is enforced by the power of the state, there is no individual liberty that can tip that scale. It is only by holding individual liberty above the “societal good” that republicanism can exist.
We see this clearly in the Second Amendment issues. My right to protect myself with firearms is above anyone else’s right to feel safe. Some people might not feel safe if they see me walking down the street with my pistol on my hip, but they are not in danger. I am not responsible for their mental state. If I wave that weapon around and threaten them with it, I have stepped over the line marking my right to protection and their right to free movement. I have hindered their right and my right to a weapon might be restricted by my actions, but not by their pathological fear of a weapon.
My cause is to the recognition of my rights as given to me by God and affirmed in the Constitution.
I have the right to free speech. I have the right to firearms. I have the right to due process of law. I have the right to religious expression. I have the right to my papers and effects. Without warrant or probable cause of a crime being committed or about to be committed, the government has no right to infringe these rights.
I also have the right to every other thing that does not infringe another person’s freedom or exercise of their rights.
As such, I am within the Constitutional framework this nation was founded on and legally bound to protect.
If the government exceeds its authority and seeks to limit any or all of these rights, I have the legal right to seek redress and force it, one way or the other, to obey the Constitution and limit itself to the legal authority that it was issued under the Constitution. Where the government has become an entity of itself, drawing its authority from its own force of arms, it is a rogue government and deserving of disobedience and aggression.
It is not the United States of America as formed and given authority under the Constitution that has become hostile toward my liberty, but the government acting illegally and outside its charter abusing its citizens and authority that has caused my acts of rebellion.
Found at Mad Medic
WARREN, N.H. – Bringing the national gun debate to a tiny New England town on Tuesday, the daughter of the slain principal of Sandy Hook Elementary confronted Sen. Kelly Ayotte at the lawmaker’s first town hall meeting since she voted against expanded background checks on all commercial gun sales.
Erica Lafferty, who first met with the Republican senator in Washington earlier this month after she opposed the compromise negotiated by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., was visibly angry as she spoke into the microphone at the meeting, which drew more than 100 people who came to condemn or support Ayotte’s vote.
“You had mentioned that day the burden on owners of gun stores that the expanded background checks would harm. I am just wondering why the burden of my mother being gunned down in the halls of her elementary school isn’t more important than that,” said Lafferty, whose mother Dawn Hochsprung was gunned down by Newtown shooter Adam Lanza.
I heard these remarks on my drive this morning and knew I had to respond to this pathetic display, but Jeff Goldstein beat me to it:
Answer: your mother was gunned down with a weapon stolen by a guy who killed his own mother by shooting her.
And perhaps had someone in the school been armed besides the murderer with the stolen weapon, your mother would still be alive. I know that’s no real comfort, but it has the luxury of being the truth. No extra burden put on law abiding citizens would have stopped that horror from happening. But perhaps had the murderer believed he wasn’t walking in to a turkey shoot, he would have thought twice.
Oh, and pimping out your own dead mother with the object of denying law abiding citizens their natural right to protect themselves — something your mother couldn’t do thanks to laws passed in your state — that’s some sick-in-the-head shit.
Indeed, it is, but that is the state of our Culture these days.
We live in a society where, thanks to the infection of Leftist Thinking, the personal has become political. Using one’s dead loved ones for political purposes is acceptable because this Society values ends more than it does the morality of the means. Nothing is beyond the pale. No behavior is proscribed. Prudence and discretion are seen as negatives.
But the situation is even more complex. American Society is also a Therapeutic Society, where feelings and emotions have been exalted, placed on a shiny pedestal, and where Reason has been delegitimized, where one no longer grieves in private, and where being a victim or related to a victim of crime grants someone expert status is the eyes of their fellow citizens.
Could This Be One Explanation?
American Culture is sick, it may be in grave condition because the minds within it are so poisoned.
For her own sake, for the sake of her sanity, Mrs. Lafferty should withdraw from the public eye and work on overcoming her grief in private and she should contemplate the horror that is her pimping of her murdered Mother.
_ *Enough with the exotic spelling of first names! Enough! One has to wonder if this practice isn’t a small tactic in the effort to undermine and destroy all things Western and especially all things English.
From Camp of The Saints:
Via Washington Times:
A new law in Kansas that criminalizes the enforcement of federal gun controls in the state is unconstitutional, Attorney General Eric H. Holder said.
“In purporting to override federal law and to criminalize the official acts of federal officers, [the law] directly conflicts with federal law and is therefore unconstitutional,” Mr. Holder wrote to Gov. Sam Brownback in a letter dated April 26. “Federal officers who are responsible for enforcing federal laws and regulations in order to maintain public safety cannot be forced to choose between the risk of a criminal prosecution by a state and the continued performance of their federal duties.”
Mr. Holder cites the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says federal law trumps conflicting state authority or exercise of power. Kansas’s law became effective April 25.
Mr. Holder wrote that federal authorities “will continue to execute their duties to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations. Moreover, the United States will take all appropriate action, including litigation if necessary, to prevent the State of Kansas from interfering with the activities of federal officials enforcing federal law.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
I would love to see Nanny Bloomberg’s reaction to stories like this.
Via Red Alert:
In the wake of the U.S. Senate’s failed background check legislation, the Alabama legislature is one step closer to passing its own gun bill — to prevent any new federal gun control laws from infringing on Alabamians’ right to bear arms.
The Alabama state Senate voted, 24-6, on Tuesday to approve a piece of legislation that would prohibit federal gun control laws from being upheld in the state if those laws are deemed a “violation of the Second Amendment.”
“They are not going to use our law enforcement resources to enforce their law that we believe is unconstitutional,” state Sen. Paul Sanford (R-Madison), one of the bill’s co-authors, said during the debate.
Along with Sanford, the “Second Amendment Preservation Act,” was also authored by state Sens. Scott Beason (R-Blount, Jefferson, St. Clair), Shadrack McGill (R-DeKalb, Jackson, Madison), Clay Scofield (R-Blount, Madison, Marshall) and Tom Whatley (R-Lee, Russell, Tallapoosa).
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Senator Reid Trying to Resuscitate Gun Registration Help GOA put heat on Senators while they’re home on recess!
“Larry Pratt with the Gun Owners of America is effective. I don’t deal with them myself, but the fact is, they are effective.” — F-rated Congressman Peter King (R-NY), April 4, 2013
You guys won a tremendous victory two weeks ago. And the press had all but written off President Obama as having been dealt a major, crushing blow.
But now, the Left is relentlessly hammering those Senators who voted right. They are running ads in their states. Their minions are writing letters to the editor. They are using their platform in the media to relentlessly hammer those who voted for freedom.
And while all this is happening, look at what the New York Times reported on Thursday:
“Talks to revive gun control legislation are quietly under way on Capitol Hill as a bipartisan group of senators seeks a way to bridge the differences that led to last week’s collapse … to overhaul the country’s gun laws.”
Plus, we have to stay active, and keep contacting each and every Senator.
The message is the same: No gun control! Not one word of gun registration, background checks or infringements. Nothing!
Can’t remember how your Senator voted? GOA has posted all the votes on its site.
We are so close to winning, but fighting gun control is very expensive. The Hill newspaper told Senators this past Wednesday:
“Gun Owners of America, which also vigorously fought the Senate bill, spent more than $313,000 on lobbying this past quarter, an increase over [what] they dropped at this point in 2012.”
ACTION: Congress is out of session this week. So please make sure that you visit your Senators when they are home — go to their town hall meetings … call their local district offices … write letters to the editor … do everything you can to make your voice heard.
Thank those who voted right. Rebuke those who voted wrong.
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Two weeks ago an amendment to the gun control legislation which would require universal background checks for the purchase of all firearm sales failed in the Senate and Harry Reid promptly pulled the entire legislation from the floor. But not before he voted against the background checks as well.
Harry Reid’s vote was simply a procedural maneuver which would allow the legislation to be taken up at a later date, so while those who are opposed to the legislation celebrated it was an incomplete victory.
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
We Won a Stunning Victory Today!
“Schumer’s spokesman Brian Fallon took note of Gun Owners of America’s role in the debate, tweeting a link to the [New York] Times profile and saying the group ‘is making deal on even background checks extremely hard.’” – TPM Media, “Democrats Blame Gun Owners of America for Gun Control Setback,” April 8, 2013
You guys did it. We all did it – together!
For four months, the laughing hyenas on MSNBC and in the White House have been cackling hysterically about the “bitter clingers” who actually own guns and value the Second Amendment.
Well, who’s laughing now?
The TPM quote above indicated – more than a week ago – that things weren’t going well for anti-gun Democrats. The New York Times also lamented on April 3 that:
The group [GOA] has already been successful in both freezing senators, particularly Republicans, who have appeared to be on the fence about supporting bills to expand background checks.
Have you ever wondered if your activism makes any difference at all? Well, today, you saw a dramatic answer to that question, as we won an incredible victory.
You guys scorched the Senate offices with phone calls. Many of you reported to us that their phones were ringing endlessly (as they were busy handling other calls) … that in many cases your Senator’s mailboxes were full … and in some cases, that they even hung up on you.
Today was a textbook example of how grassroots activism makes a difference! But even still, you can be sure that the gun grabbers will be back soon, trying hard to resurrect this issue.
And that’s why your GOA will remain ever vigilant and will alert you to any proposed infringements of your liberty.
Here are the highlights of what happened today:
(1) The most important vote was the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer national gun registry proposal. With 60 votes needed for passage, the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer amendment was shot down by a vote of 54-46.
GOA and NRA strongly opposed the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer amendment. But we were surprised to see that another gun group – not only said they supported the Toomey language, but – said they helped write the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer text. Thankfully, their support for this gun control language was not enough to get it passed.
(2) The Cornyn-Vitter-Thune amendment – pushed hard by Gun Owners of America – received a 57-43 vote (so we fell three votes short since 60 were needed). This provision would have allowed concealed carry holders and persons in constitutional carry states to carry nationwide. The overwhelming vote on this amendment sets the stage for bringing it up again and again on must-pass legislation.
Today is a day to celebrate! We thank God for all of you and for all the Help that we have received in this long struggle to stop infringements of our liberties.
Here’s what is still left for tomorrow.
Harry Reid’s bill (S. 649) is still on the floor of the Senate, and there are two scheduled votes that will take place tomorrow. Eventually, the Senate will vote on whether to end debate on the bill (known as cloture), but that vote won’t necessarily take place tomorrow. The Senate will need 60 votes to end debate, but if they can’t reach that threshold, the bill effectively dies.
So GOA is telling Senators to vote AGAINST cloture on the bill, whenever that vote comes.
ACTION: We think that we can defeat cloture on final passage of the bill. But, to be safe, GOA is encouraging activists to contact their Senators and urge them oppose cloture! You can reach them at 202-224-3121.
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
After hearing the news that he had expected for several days Barack Obama came out swinging against a senate “minority” for killing an amendment which would have required universal background checks on all firearms transactions:
Families that had known unspeakable grief,” Obama said, reached out “to protect the lives of all children …. A few minutes ago, a minority in the Senate decided it wasn’t worth it…
Found at Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
In a free country, the police are the good guys. But this isn’t always the case in a country run by oligarchical collectivists, particularly when the ruling class has been going out of its way to gin up anti-gun hysteria — as Army Master Sergeant C.J. Grisham and his son learned the hard way:
A decorated war veteran on a Boy Scout hike with his 15-year-old son was arrested alongside a Texas country road after a police officer accused him of “rudely displaying” a firearm.
Army Master Sgt. C.J. Grisham told Fox News he was illegally disarmed by members of the Temple Police Dept. – even though he held the proper permits to carry his weapons.
Grisham and his son were on a 10-mile hike in a rural area populated by wild boars and cougars. He was carrying an AR-15 rifle and a .45 caliber pistol.
The vet — who earned a Bronze Star With Valor — recounts his misadventure:
On March 16, 2013, my son and I were hiking along country roads among pastures and fields with my 15-year old son to help him earn his hiking merit badge. I always enjoy these father/son hikes because it gives me time alone with my son. As I always do when we go on these hikes and walks, I took my trusty rifle with me as there are coyotes, wild hogs, and cougars in our area. In Texas, it is legal to openly carry a rifle or shotgun as long as you do so in a manner that isn’t calculated to cause alarm. In other words, you can’t walk around waving your rifle at people. I always carry my rifle slung across my chest dangling, not holding it in my hands.
At about the 5 mile mark of our hike, a voice behind us asked us to stop and the officer motioned for us to approach him. He got out of his car and met us a few feet later. He asked us what we were doing and I explained that we were hiking for my son’s merit badge. He then asked me what I’m doing with the rifle, to which I responded in a calm manner, “Does it matter, officer? Am I breaking the law?”
At that point, the officer grabbed my rifle without warning or indication. He didn’t ask for my rifle and he didn’t suggest he would take it from me. He simply grabbed it. This startled me and I instantly pulled back – the rifle was attached to me – and I asked what he thought he was doing because he’s not taking my rifle. He then pulled his service pistol on me and told me to take my hands off the weapon and move to his car, which I complied with. He then slammed me into the hood of his car and I remembered I had a camera on me (one of the requirements of the hiking merit badge is to document your hikes). This video is the rest of that encounter. Up to this point, I am not told why I am being stopped, why he tried to disarm me, or even that I’m under arrest.
Following this, they even terrorized his son by intimidating him into answering questions without a parent present:
Chris followed his dad’s instructions to keep the videotape going — even though it’s clear the incident took an emotional toll on the boy. As the officers put Grisham in the back of the car, the video picked up sounds of Chris crying.
The officers told Grisham they would take the boy home.
“I told him not to answer any questions,” Grisham said. “I told him not to answer a single question until his mother was there — and she would answer the questions for him.”
But that’s not what happened.
Chris told Fox News that the police officer refused to let him out of the car until he answered a series of questions. The boy had not been arrested.
“The officer told me that I wasn’t getting out of the patrol car until I answered his questions,” Chris said. “He said I didn’t have a choice. I was scared.”
Grisham said his boy was traumatized by the incident.
“Every time he sees a police officer he has a panic attack,” he said. “That’s unfortunate because we always taught our kids to respect police officers. My wife and I are angry about it.”
He said he explained to his son that they did nothing wrong on that day.
“My son has his own copy of the Constitution,” Grisham said. “He understands his rights. He understands the concept of choosing the hard right over the easy wrong.”
If only the country as a whole still understood this concept, the situation would never have gotten this bad.
O’Hellno and the Commie Congress Want to Turn 95% of U.S. Citizens into Criminals Because of Gun Ownership
Market Ticker: Go To Hell Harry Reid and Dianne Feinswine:
This bill goes far further and effectively bans lawful gun retailing!
I wondered why they were talking about “Straw Purchasers” in their news releases when straw purchasing is already illegal and exposes the person who does so to severe criminal penalties.
The reason is that now they intend to steal all property involved in the straw purchase even for an unaware participant — such as a gun store where a straw purchase takes place!
‘(a)(1) Any person convicted of a violation of section 932 or 933 shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law–
‘(A) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of such violation; and
‘(B) any of the person’s property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, such violation.
Note the language. Not only will this be construed to steal the house, vehicle and other property of both the straw purchaser and the ultimate recipient as-written it can and probably will also be construed to attack a retailer who has an employee that is involved in such a transaction.
If you didn’t understand Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell’s filibuster intent (along with others) you should now understand it quite-clearly. Not only is there an attempt to define the victims of a crime as federal felons in this piece of blatantly unconstitutional trash but in addition there is a thinly-veiled attack upon lawful firearms retailers in the form of forfeiture provisions that can be (and presumably will be) easily abused to seize property upon the flimsiest of pretext.
From Nice Deb:
April, 10, 2013 — nicedeb
Mark Levin spent a good portion of his show, Tuesday combatting the notion that the Second Amendment is not under attack as Senators prepare to vote on the Democrat’s (as yet unseen) gun control package on Thursday.
He argued that the federal government does not have the power to propose any law that abridges or constricts the Second Amendment of the United States.
“The 2nd Amendment like the rest of the bill of rights is part of the constitution”, he explained. “It exists as protection against usurpation by against the very congress that is now debating its very existence! The 2nd Amendment belongs to you and me! ….Like the rest of the Constitution. It’s not up for grabs! Is the Senate holding a Constitutional Convention?!”
He went on to say, “it’s important to realize that this Thursday, the Senate intends to vote on changing the 2nd Amendment without any pretense of going through the constitutional Amendment processes. The Senate is meeting as if its a Constitutional Convention and it can do whatever it damn well wants to do!”
An up or down vote on 2nd Amendment is unconstitutional,” Levin fumed. “There are no up or down votes on the Constitution!”
“On top of that, we have no idea what specific law is even being proposed”, he continued. “It’s Tuesday evening. We have no idea what they’re going to debate on Thursday. And yet, you have Democrats of course, and Republicans as well, insisting that we pass this law or that law without the benefit of a single hearing. Without the benefit of public notice of any kind. This is not ‘little r republicanism!’ He thundered, ”this is Democratic tyranny!”
From Nice Deb: http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Found at Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Math is so hard…SO just manipulate the numbers that disagree with you into ones that agree with you..Is the left’s way…And is what happens when you do not teach real world subjects in Public Schools..
I heard something rather disturbing this morning on the news, 50% of the people believe we need more gun control, 40% believed it should stay the same and 10% believed we needed less… Then it occurred to me that the same percentages were true for the 5th grade equation below. Only 10% got this equation correct when I first posted it.
The majority 60% said the answer was 1, 30% gave some other random number, and only 10% gave the correct answer of 7. 7 is the correct answer, So because the majority said 1 is that the correct answer?… NO, because we have rules for mathematical operations. Just because the majority of the people want gun control doesn’t make it constitutional or right. The equation above proves that the majority of the people get a 5th grade equation wrong 90% of the time.
All gun laws are unconstitutional because we have rules for law making just like we have rules for math. Those rules are stated in the constitution. “The right to bear arms shall not be infringed”. There are no exceptions, not for felons, scary people, scary guns, crazy people, people having a bad day, etc… And I don’t see any majority over rules the constitution clause either.
Suppose the law being considered was to block all blacks from gun ownership or prohibiting blacks from being out past sun set. As a percentage of population they are more violent and commit more crimes than any other race as America’s prison populations prove. And now suppose the majority of the people said that banning blacks is what they wanted. Should the congress pass this law because that is what the mob wants? The constitution prohibits this type of law based on race. But, If we are now discarding the right of each citizen to bear arms, why not disregard this part of the constitution blocking laws based on race or national origin?
The government now wants us to ask permission from the government through a back ground check to exercise a right that shall not be infringed by that same government. And there are members of congress that don’t think that sounds idiotic. It is no less idiotic or unconstitutional then banning blacks from gun ownership or being on the streets at night.
It sounds great to say that all felons cannot own guns, or all crazy people can’t have guns. Let’s have a “No Gun List”. As if that will stop the violence. It will not. In Atlanta a gunman took 4 firemen hostage because his home was being foreclosed on. He demanded his lights and cable be turned back on… So now we need financial back ground checks for guns… OH… and I’ve seen people lose it when getting divorced, So divorced people need to be placed on the “No Gun List” too…
Just like banning blacks from being out on the streets at night will not stop them from committing crimes, neither will a “No Gun List” stop the violence… ALL Gun laws are unconstitutional. And we are being governed by a mob of people that can’t get a 5th grade equation correct… welcome to Idiocracy…
From Mad Medic:
What’s in It: Obama’s Gun Control Package
- Require criminal background checks for all gun sales, including sales by private sellers
- Reinstate the ban on assault weapons
- Limit ammo magazines to 10 rounds
- Ban armor-piercing bullets, except for military and law enforcement
- Toughen criminal penalties for “straw purchasers,” who are people who go through background check to buy a gun for someone else
- Spend $4 billion to subsidize 15,000 police officers
- Train more police officers, first responders and school officials on how to respond to active shooter attacks
- Spend $30 million for schools to develop emergency response plans
- Expand mental health programs for young people
- Confirm President Obama’s nominee for ATF Director
- Direct the ATF to disregard regulation that allows for importation of weapons more than 50 years old
- Spend $20 million to track violent deaths across the nation
Found at Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
The Battle Will Take Longer than We’d Hoped
But there’s still a very good chance we can win!
“Gun Owners of America [has] been pressing lawmakers who may have wavered on this emotional issue of background checks.” – CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, April 10, 2013
We’ve been fighting these gun control battles for almost 40 years now. And we almost always win. But it’s almost always a nail-biter.
And so it is on Obama’s gun control agenda.
We’d hoped that we could stop the gun control bribe-o-thon early (and risk-free) by blocking the motion to proceed to the package. But thanks to sell-outs like Pennsylvania’s one-term senator, Pat Toomey, we’re going to have to take a different battle position and defeat the package at a later stage.
The Senate today overcame the Paul-Cruz-Lee filibuster and voted to move to proceed to Harry Reid’s gun control bill (S. 649). Where Reid needed 60 votes, the tally was 68-31. Click here to see if your Senator sold you out by voting to “move to proceed” to the bill.
Republican defectors who voted anti-gun were: Alexander (TN), Ayotte (NH), Burr (NC), Chambliss (GA), Collins (ME), Corker (TN), Coburn (OK), Flake (AZ), Isakson (GA), McCain (AZ), Heller (NV), Hoeven (ND), Kirk (IL), Graham (SC), Toomey (PA) and Wicker (MS).
So, here’s where we are. Right after the Senate proceeded to the gun control bill, Harry Reid used his privileged recognition to put a bunch of amendments in place. In Senate parlance, they are referred to as an “amendment tree;” and they contain the universal registry bill, the Feinstein gun ban, and the magazine ban. These will be voted on in upcoming days.
As for the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer universal registry bill, don’t believe the press’ efforts to sugar-coat it. If you have ever had an “Internet … posting” on (or related to) your gun, you can sell it only by going to a dealer and filling out a 4473 and getting the government’s approval. Only a cave man would be exempt.
And once you have a 4473? Well, the ATF is going from dealer to dealer, copying the information on these forms, and feeding it into a database. But, says Toomey, he’s against universal registries. This is where it would have helped if Toomey had consulted someone who knew something about guns.
Registration and violation of privacy.
First of all, Toomey’s anti-registry language prohibits photocopying the 4473′s, but it doesn’t prohibit going into the FFL with a laptop and copying all the information. Second, ATF takes the position that the data it’s accumulating in a database is not a “registry,” so Toomey’s ban does no good. Third, guess what the sanction is for violation of Toomey’s anti-registry language? Answer: Eric Holder has to choose to prosecute himself and his own department.
But this isn’t the only bad thing about Toomey-Manchin-Schumer.
Section 107 of the sell-out also waives any federal privacy prohibitions under HIPAA to sending the names of Americans with PTSD, ADHD, and post partem depression to the gun ban database. But that’s not all.
Believe in Jesus, hand in your guns?
Because private shrinks will be able to add patients names into a federal database of the mentally ill – without due process – you will be at their mercy.
As Red State editor, Erick Erickson says, “Activist mental health providers will probably be overly aggressive in adding people to the list. Give it five years in liberal areas and people who believe in the physical resurrection of Christ will probably get automatic entry onto the list.”
And as for veterans? Toomey-Manchin-Schumer reinforces the proposition that bureaucrats in the Department of Veterans Affairs can take away veterans’ rights without any due process. If a veteran has $30,000 to spend getting back the rights Toomey-Manchin-Schumer wrongly took from him, the sell-out creates yet another redundant money-trap for restoration of rights that shouldn’t have been taken away in the first place.
Repealing gun owner protections.
What if you want to travel across the country? McClure-Volkmer allowed you to do that with an unloaded gun in the trunk (18 U.S.C. 926A). But, under the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out, unless you can “demonstrate,” to the satisfaction of the New York police (1) where you came from, (2) where you’re going, (3) that you’re legally entitled to possess the gun in the place you can from, and (4) that you’re legally entitled to possess the gun in the place you’re going, they will arrest you in New York.
The Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out creates a Biden-like commission to insure that the cries for gun control continue.
Like sprinkles on a pile of dung, Toomey and Schumer steal some of the proposals we drafted and try to use them to get us to buy onto gun control. But it won’t work.
The gun movement is united against this disgusting pile of gun control.
Here is the new battlefield. Because of the Senate rules, many of the upcoming gun control votes will need 60 (out of 100 votes) to move forward. That will almost certainly be the case with the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer proposal. And because the entire Second amendment movement – GOA, NRA, etc. – is against the Toomey language, it virtually ensures his amendment will fail.
And if Toomey-Manchin-Schumer doesn’t pass, then Reid probably won’t have enough votes to overcome a second filibuster on the bill – as it would contain the original anti-gun language sponsored by Reid and Schumer. This all but guarantees that the legislation would die, as Republicans and a half-a-dozen Democrat Senators would then team up to keep the bill from getting the required 60 votes.
One last question or thought: Did we waste our time supporting the Paul-Cruz-Lee filibuster and fighting the motion to proceed? No, because we forced Obama to fire most of his ammunition, as he dragged his human props around Washington in an effort to exploit them for political gain.
If Obama had been able to wait to play this card until Toomey-Manchin-Schumer came up for a vote, that vote would be a lot harder for us to win.
But Obama has already played this card for his “they deserve a vote” theme. Okay, they’re getting their vote. But by the time we reach the vote on cloture on Toomey-Manchin-Schumer, Obama’s exploitation of the victims of Newtown will begin to be realized for the cynical exploitative political ploy that it is. And he will be less able to shift gears and use the victims for the theme “They deserve a ‘yes’ vote.”
ACTION: Click here to contact your Senators. Tell them to vote against cloture on the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out.
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Posted on | April 11, 2013
is there anything more disgusting than a Republican senator in bipartisan compromise mode? Bloomberg’s anti-gun group starts running ads in Pennsylvania and Pat Toomey folds like a cheap suit. Say the magic words: Bipartisan compromise!
Senators struck a bipartisan deal Wednesday to expand background checks in gun transactions, inflaming the National Rifle Association while drawing support from a growing number of lawmakers. The proposal, drafted by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), calls for an incremental expansion of NICS background checks for sales at gun shows and over the Internet.
I could think of another magic word, denoting a person who performs fellatio, that would describe Pat Toomey. I mean, we were on the verge of winning this thing — that is to say, the endless anti-gun drumbeat of media noise was becoming tiresome and people were losing interest — and suddenly, because of some TV ads, Toomey crumples. Meanwhile, more bipartisan compromise news:
A bipartisan group of senators has largely agreed on a broad immigration bill that would require tough border measures to be in place before illegal immigrants could take the first steps to become American citizens.
Persons performing fellatio!
And did I mention that a bunch of these Republican fellatio performers had dinner at the White House last night?
Please, somebody, tell me again how important it is to help elect Republicans to the Senate. Because I’m kind of having trouble right now seeing any point in it at all.
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
Urgent action required. It is urgent that every gun owner call their Senators today and demand that they oppose the “See a Shrink, Lose your Guns” sell-out bill that is being authored by Senators Pat Toomey (R) and Joe Manchin (D) – but which also has Chuck Schumer’s fingerprints all over it. Call immediately at 202-224-3121.
See a Shrink, Lose your Guns. The anti-gun “ranters” have spent the last week telling us that Republican Senators can’t filibuster Harry Reid’s gun control bill; that they can’t cut off debate to a bill they haven’t seen yet. “Let the bill come up,” they say. “We need to see the bill” before Senators can vote against cloture to proceed to it.
Well, we’ve seen the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out, and it’s worse than the Feinstein gun ban, which will reportedly be tied to it and offered simultaneously in a Senate procedure known as an “amendment tree.”
Toomey and Manchin will claim that their bill only covers “gun show sales” and Internet sales. But if you’ve ever talked about your gun and /or let it be known you’d like to sell or buy a gun on the Internet, this language covers you. If you advertise your gun in the church bulletin and the bulletin is put on the Internet, you’re covered.
The only exemption is for sales that are sold exclusively by word of mouth. The increased number of background checks would likely exacerbate the system breakdowns (inherent to NICS) which have shut down gun shows over and over again. It would mean that Americans who were illegally denied firearms because their names were similar to other people’s would effectively be barred from owning a gun. (We would never tolerate such delays for voting rights or other freedoms that we are guaranteed.)
And for those Republicans who think they’re going to be able to offer their useless amendments, guess what? Reid is reportedly going to use a procedure to block out all amendments (called an “amendment tree”). And there are plenty of Senators standing in line to make sure that the Senate doesn’t give “unanimous consent” to let those Republicans offer their amendments.
So if you live in a rural area, you’re effectively barred from selling or buying a gun – or it at least becomes very, very difficult.
Incidentally, the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer “national registry” language is full of holes. There will be a national gun registry as a result of this sell-out.
But that’s not the worst part. Under an amendment in the bill to HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), you could have your guns taken away because your private shrink thinks you’re “dangerous” and could send your name directly to the FBI Instant Check system.
Did you think it was terrible that 150,000 military veterans had been added into the NICS system because they’d seen a VA shrink about their PTSD? Well guess what? Now it’s going to happen to the rest of the population … by the millions!
And the next step, of course, will be to begin to sue psychiatrists that don’t send every single patient’s name to the Instant Check system, and to make sure that their lives are ruined if they don’t send a patient to NICS and anything goes wrong.
The bottom line: “See a shrink; lose your guns.”
All of this will reportedly be on an amendment tree with the Feinstein gun ban and magazine bans.
Repeal of gun owner protections. In addition, Toomey no doubt unintentionally agreed to repeal one of the most important protections for gun owners that was included in the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act – the provision that would allow you to take an unloaded, locked-up gun through states like New York without being stopped. Under a new subsection (c), the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer bill would require you to “demonstrate” to the satisfaction of New York police where you were coming from and where you are going to. And, if you don’t do that to their satisfaction, they can arrest you.
Please keep in mind, nothing in this bill would have stopped Newtown dirtbag from killing his mother and taking the firearms that she owned and perpetrating the horrible crimes that he committed.
Nothing is this bill would actually make children safer at schools. There is nothing that will actually keep bad guys from stealing or illegally acquiring guns, but there’s plenty that will threaten our gun rights!
ACTION: Click here to contact your two senators immediately. Tell them the “see a shrink; lose your guns” sellout is even worse than the Feinstein gun ban which will reportedly be on the same amendment tree with it. Distribute this alert far and wide.
The Toomey-Manchin Proposal Will Allow Doctors to Block Your Right to Guns
The proposal will allow a doctor to add a patient to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) without ever telling the patient he or she has been added.
There would be no due process requirement. Not all doctors will be able to do it with the same ease, but many will. Knowing a doctor could add him to a federal database as mentally ill without his knowledge could potentially dissuade a patient from going to the doctor in the first place to get help.
Worse, if the doctor does so and makes a mistake, the patient would have to actively work through the system to get himself removed — guilty before being proven innocent. In some states, should a doctor flag you as having mental illness without your knowledge, you may very well see the state come collect your previously purchased guns.
Activist mental health providers will probably be overly aggressive in adding people to the list. Give it five years in liberal areas and people who believe in the physical resurrection of Christ will probably get automatic entry onto the list.
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
April 10, 2013
Barack Obama Couldn’t Care Less about Dead Children
President Barack Obama is firmly committed to pushing an anti-gun agenda. He’s so steadfast in his conviction that he was willing to fly, on his $180K per hour magic carpet, the families of the children and school workers that perished in Newtown, Connecticut all the way to Washington DC. After breakfast, Sandy Hook family members participated in a mini anti-gun-violence, sympathy-fueled arm-twisting session where, in an effort to persuade reluctant senators to sway his way on the issue of gun control, the grieving were exploited.
The president’s current argument is that sweeping legislation is needed because 32,000 people in America die each year from gun-related violence, many of whom are children. Yet, Obama’s carelessness with the truth omits the fact that 32,000 people make up only 0.01% of the American population.
Pressing the Senate to pass a bill whose ultimate goal is to curtail gun ownership because children die from gunshot wounds would be like lobbying for a bill to outlaw household cleaning products because every year thousands of children die as a result of accidental poisoning.
The truth is that in comparison to other causes of death, guns are responsible for a relatively small percentage of fatalities. Even so, the president remains focused like a laser on passing unpopular legislation and using the prevention of death as an excuse to restrict constitutional freedom and limit the sale of firearms and firearm accessories. For good measure, Obama also insinuates that any American unwilling to acquiesce to his anti-gun viewpoint might be harboring nefarious intentions.
And so to accomplish his goal of watering down the power of the U.S. Constitution, Barack Obama thinks portraying himself as the compassionate champion of dead children is his best bet. Yet isn’t it true that Obama couldn’t even save the lives of four adults in Benghazi, let alone 20 little ones in Newtown? For Barack Obama to portray himself as some sort of thwarter of untimely death is ludicrous. Moreover, an avid abortion advocate talking in memoriam about the lost lives of children is another example of this president’s use of disingenuousness to divert attention from failed policies whose ramifications affect the 99.99% of those whose lives will never be touched by gun violence.
If preventing death were really Obama’s goal, then he’d address the much larger number of Americans who die for reasons other than lethal gunfire.
For instance, what about the 600,000 Americans who perish annually from heart disease, or the 575,000 who succumb to cancer? On behalf of all the American children whose lives are negatively impacted (if not snuffed out) by these diseases, why hasn’t children’s advocate/gun-control crusader Obama stressed the urgent need to fund cancer and heart disease research?
Thus far, even though there are approximately 120,000 deaths each year from all kinds of accidents, to date the families of the 32,000 dead car accident victims have not been invited to fly on Air Force One to Washington DC to address the US Senate about preventing fatal car crashes.
And then there are the 50,000 Americans a year who succumb to pneumonia and flu and the 30,000 who die annually from a little-known but highly preventable hospital-acquired bacterium called C-Diff, or Clostridium Difficile.
If Barack Obama believes that 0.01% of the population is too many to die from gun violence, then the same should hold true for seasonal flu and C-Difficile. But it’s 10 weeks into his second term and so far Barack has yet to campaign on behalf of controlling the growing problem of deadly super bugs.
If the families of the Sandy Hook victims earned a ride on Air Force One and had an opportunity to plead their case before the Senate for stricter controls on gun ownership, why not also fly the grieving parents of 8-month-old Charlee Mackenzie Ratliff, who, while recovering from surgery to repair a hole in her heart, died in May of 2010 after acquiring a deadly case of C-Diff?
Charlee’s mom and dad could come to Capitol Hill to address controlling the spread of bacterial infections that are killing the very young, those with weakened immune systems, and the elderly in hospitals and nursing homes across America. Why not invite the Ratliffs to raise awareness on how, in the coming years, limited Obamacare monies will inevitably lead to an increase in the threat of fatalities resulting from hospital-acquired infections?
Speaking wholly about curtailing Second Amendment rights, at the University of Hartford in Connecticut, Barack Obama delivered an ardent plea for Americans to pressure their local representatives to support stricter gun-control legislation. The president’s words could have also been applied to the heartbreaking deaths of victims who’ve lost their lives from causes other than gun violence.
Entreating the nation to reach an agreement with him on gun-control, Obama said:
If you’re an American who wants to do something to prevent more families from knowing the immeasurable anguish that these families know, now is the time to act. Now is the time to get engaged, to get involved, to push back on fear, frustration, and misinformation. Now is the time to make your voice heard from every state house to the corridors of Congress.
Based on those sentiments alone, the only conclusion one can glean from the president’s selective concern is that either Obama only cares about the lives of specific children, or what we’ve surmised all along is being confirmed: the president is exploiting the gun-death issue with an explicit goal that has nothing to do with averting premature death. In other words, once again, Obama is blatantly lying by omission, which is just a fancy way of saying that in the overall scheme of advancing progressive policy, the president couldn’t care less about who dies or how.