GUNS: Gun Prohibition will be done like Drug Prohibition

Saturday, August 13, 2016
 
 
Image may contain: text
Brandon WeberLike Page

3 hrs · 

Indeed. Any constitutional scholars out there who have a different point of view?

I am NOT  “constitutional scholar”; nor do I play one on TV.

That being said … … …

Unfortunately, the ATF makes the diktats that take guns away. There was a Constitutional Amendment to have alcohol prohibition. BUT NONE was required to have drug prohibition. Why should guns be any different than drugs?

The only defense is for juries to nullify on non-violent drug and gun cases. That’s what ended alcohol prohibition.

# – # – # – # – # 

Unfortunately, the ATF makes the diktats that take guns away. There was a Constitutional Amendment to have alcohol prohibition. BUT NONE was required to have drug prohibition. Why should guns be any different than drugs?


GUNS: Gooferment Skrules are idiotic too

Sunday, August 7, 2016

2016-Aug-07

FROM FACEBOOK

*** begin quote ***

Greg Morin
12 hrs

So my 9th grade son is taking AP government and his coy teacher says she won’t reveal her political leanings…but then gives it away with her idiotic opinion of the 2nd amendment is being used wrong because it means only people in a militia can have guns. Sigh.

So in providing my son with the basis for an argument to proffer to her as to why that is wrong it suddenly dawned on me how truly absurd that position is. A militia by definition must be armed. An unarmed militia is like an orchestra with no instruments. Why would you create an amendment to protect a right that is implied in the nature of the thing. It would be like guaranteeing all doctors the right to keep and bear scalpels, or fireman the right to keep and bear hoses.

*** end quote ***

We have to de-federalize the military and get back to state militias and troops under the control of their governors and funded by the individual States. 

Military Industrial Complex, that Ike warned us about, leads to a military run amok.

Argh!

# – # – # – # – # 


GUNS: Yes, what happens when 100 million gun owners go to war with the Feds?

Friday, August 5, 2016

FROM “Unintended Consequences” by John Ross

Recounting the infamous 4/11/86 FBI “felony car stop” in Miami FL of two known murdering bank robbers in 1970

*** begin quote ***

If this is what happens when the feds go after a couple of bank robbers who know they’re in the wrong,what’s going to happen to the feds when they go after a couple million trained, motivated, heavily armed citizens who haven’t done anything worse than exercise their Constitutional rights?

*** end quote ***

Self answering question!

# – # – # – # – # 


GUNS: The gun grabbers are aiming at conditioning children against guns

Friday, July 15, 2016

http://bearingarms.com/jenn-j/2016/07/13/latest-gun-control-legislation-takes-aim-children-reveals-sinister-truth/

Latest Gun Control Legislation Takes Aim at Children, and Reveals a Sinister Truth
Posted at 3:05 pm on July 13, 2016 by Jenn Jacques

*** begin quote ***

The Help End Assault Rifle Tragedies (HEART) Act of 2016 as announced by Markey and Gallego claims to protect children by prohibiting anyone under the age of 16 from possessing or firing machine guns and assault weapons, specifying that the law would extend to gun shows and shooting ranges.

However, the bill clearly aims to shut down all youth shooting sports and young hunters’ ability to participate in any activity that uses guns.

*** end quote ***

Always and irresistibly chasing the goal of putting the people totally under their thumbs!

# – # – # – # – # 


GUNS: Prohibitions versus people’s unwillingness to obey

Sunday, June 26, 2016

https://reason.com/archives/2016/06/21/what-will-gun-controllers-do-when-americ

What Will Gun Controllers Do When Americans Ignore an ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban?
Prohibitions have a long history of stumbling over people’s unwillingness to obey. This time won’t be any different.
J.D. Tuccille | June 21, 2016 

*** begin quote ***

Prohibition was kneecapped by Americans’ widespread refusal to stop producing, selling, and drinking booze. Millions of Americans smoked marijuana decades before majority sentiment creeped toward legalizing the stuff. Gays and lesbians not only surreptitiously lived and loved when they were targeted by the law—they also famously (and righteously) stomped cops who raided the Stonewall Inn, ultimately precipitating liberalization. And restrictions on exporting encryption were eased only after cryptographers illegally exported code—even printing it on T-shirts as an act of civil disobedience.

*** and ***

Molon labe, remember?

So, a United States the morning after, or a year after, or a decade after a successful effort to ban “assault weapons” will not be the scene of the “domestic disarmament” favored by prominent communitarian sociology professor Amitai Etzioni. It will be more like Prohibition-era America, but with hidden rifles substituting for stockpiled hooch and 3D printers standing in for moonshiners’ stills. And probably a bit more tense.

Those defiant gun owners will also be included in the jury pools chosen to sit in judgement of unlucky violators scooped up by law enforcement. That situation will likely replicate the difficulty prosecutors had in getting convictions of Prohibition scofflaws in the 1920s and marijuana law resisters today. “[I]f juries consistently nullify certain types of criminal charges (charges for possession of a small amount of marijuana, for example), this can render an unpopular law ineffective,” wrote John Richards at the LegalMatch blog after a jury couldn’t even be seated in Montana.

“If you pass laws that people have no respect for and they don’t follow them, then you have a real problem,” Connecticut Sen. Tony Guglielmo (R-District 35), told the Hartford Courant when large numbers of state residents flipped the bird to lawmakers and defied the new gun law.

Well… yes, you do. And like their restriction-inclined predecessors, gun controllers will have quite a mess on their hands.

*** end quote ***

Sorry, but it’s going to be very ugly very quickly.

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? . . .” — Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Just review the “great” genocides that occur after the people are disarmed.

It doesn’t end well.

So if you’re going to be killed, then you might as well go down swinging.

Way too many guns in the hands of ordinary people for them to be disarmed without their cooperation.

Sometimes Hollywood gets things correct. “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” — apocryphal unsourced quote attributed to Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

That goes for collecting all those guns!

# – # – # – # – #  


GUNS: It takes time to reload

Sunday, June 19, 2016

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/06/andrew-p-napolitano/gun-free-zones-killing-zones/

In Defense of Self-Defense
By Andrew P. Napolitano
June 16, 2016

*** begin quote ***

In the Orlando tragedy, the man who killed 49 and wounded 53 used a handgun and a rifle. The handgun accepted magazines containing 17 bullets, and the rifle accepted magazines containing 30 bullets. The killer, using both weapons, fired more than 250 times last Sunday morning. That means he reloaded his weapons about a dozen times. Each time he reloaded, he stopped shooting, as it is impossible for any person to shoot and reload simultaneously.

We know from forensics that the killer was a poor shot. We can deduce from that knowledge that he was a slow reloader. One learns to shoot first and reload later. It is likely that it took between three and seven seconds each time he reloaded the handgun and longer with the rifle. In those time periods, any trained person carrying a handgun in that Orlando nightclub could have wounded or killed him — and stopped the slaughter.

*** end quote ***

In all the angst and turmoil over all these “mass shootings”, the shooter has to reload. And, that takes time.

Even unarmed, the victims need to be courageous and take action.

Of course, it’s easier if armed. Even if that “arm” is just a swiss army knife, that MAY be enough to turn the tide of the battle. Even win the “war”. A knife to the neck can distract anyone.

Even though I’m not the example of the “trained shooter”, I can hit the center ring at 50 yards reliably. And, if I use the whole magazine, then I’m positively sure I can put one of them in the center ring. I hope that I can do as well “under fire”. If the killer is such a poor shooter, then it’s obvious he has practiced as much as the “average enthusiast”.

As the Judge points out that “gun free zones” ensures that it won’t be “free of guns”. Just guns in the possession of lawbreakers.

Argh!

# – # – # – # – #  


GUNS: What do you bet that NO charges will be filed?

Friday, June 3, 2016

http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/06/03/gun-director-admits-breaking-federal-firearms-laws-camera/

Under The Gun Director Admits Breaking Federal Firearms Laws On Camera
Posted at 11:36 am on June 3, 2016 by Bob Owens

*** begin quote ***

It is unknown what happened to these firearms and whether or not they returned with the producer to Colorado. Presumably, this crime was committed in order to highlight what the film’s proponents believe to be current inadequacies federal firearm laws, and to educate viewers on the process for obtaining a firearm. As Ms. Soechtig stated, all of the film’s content was “news to me.” Apparently, existing federal law prohibiting private interstate firearms transfers is also something that will also come as “news” to Ms. Soechtig and her staff.

Under current federal law it is a violation for any person to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in the state in which the transferor resides. (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(5).) Thus, by asking a private party in Arizona to sell the Colorado producer firearms, Ms. Soechtig and her staff induced an otherwise law abiding citizen to commit a federal crime.  There was nothing legal about what Ms. Soechtig and her staff did, despite their slanted attempt to portray in their documentary the private sale of firearms as unregulated and legal.

*** end quote ***

John S. Leonardo
U.S. Attorney

Betsy Strange
First Assistant U.S. Attorney

Two Renaissance Square 40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
(602) 514-7500

Public Affairs Contact: Cosme.Lopez@usdoj.gov

# – # – #

Victoria.Vasquez@usdoj.gov

May I have a comment from Mr. Leonardo for my blog?

It seems like this is an OBVIOUS violation of Federal law and should at least be investigated. Since those involved seem proud of their actions, maybe they can explain it to a judge?

I will be happy to post the response.

# – # – # – # – # 

It is unknown what happened to these firearms and whether or not they returned with the producer to Colorado. Presumably, this crime was committed in order to highlight what the film’s proponents believe to be current inadequacies federal firearm laws, and to educate viewers on the process for obtaining a firearm. As Ms. Soechtig stated, all of the film’s content was “news to me.” Apparently, existing federal law prohibiting private interstate firearms transfers is also something that will also come as “news” to Ms. Soechtig and her staff.

Under current federal law it is a violation for any person to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in the state in which the transferor resides. (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(5).) Thus, by asking a private party in Arizona to sell the Colorado producer firearms, Ms. Soechtig and her staff induced an otherwise law abiding citizen to commit a federal crime.  There was nothing legal about what Ms. Soechtig and her staff did, despite their slanted attempt to portray in their documentary the private sale of firearms as unregulated and legal.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,843 other followers

%d bloggers like this: