Rahm’s Emanuel’s Kids School Protected by Armed On-Duty Police

Comments Off on Rahm’s Emanuel’s Kids School Protected by Armed On-Duty Police

Well we just reported about Obama and NBC’s David Gregory’s children having 11 armed guards at their schools. Now we learn Rahm Emanuel’s children have the same armed protection, yet they are making fun of doing this for the public school system.

Breitbart News has confirmed that The University of Chicago Laboratory School, where Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel sends his children, is protected by an armed, on-duty police officer.

University of Chicago Police public information personnel informed Breitbart News that there is at least one armed officer on duty a the school everyday and has been for “several years.”

Emanuel blasted NRA spokesman Wayne LaPierre after he proposed adding armed officers to schools across the country last week in response to the elementary school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut.

A written statement from Mayor Emanuel said:

It’s outrageous and unsettling that the NRA would choose to address gun violence not by taking assault weapons off our streets, but by adding more guns to our schools… That is not the right answer for our society, our schools and most importantly our children.

People across this country, from small towns to big cities, are united and ready to pass common-sense gun control legislation. The time has come for the NRA to get on board or get out of the way.

Given his staunch opposition to the suggestions made by the NRA to protect America’s children, will Mayor Emanuel now take the lead on ending the security procedures in place at his own children’s school?

H/T: Second City Cop

EXCLUSIVE: MCCONNELL CALLS OUT OBAMA’S NEGOTIATION CHARADE

Comments Off on EXCLUSIVE: MCCONNELL CALLS OUT OBAMA’S NEGOTIATION CHARADE

It appears Obama wants the US to go over the fiscal cliff  for political gain and to attempt to put the blame on Republicans.

The office of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) responded to reports today that President Barack Obama called him and other congressional leaders to receive updates about negotiations to avoid the Jan. 1 “fiscal cliff” by noting that it was the “first time McConnell has heard from any Democrat, including the President, on this since Thanksgiving.”

The President and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) made a show of returning to Washington this week, as if to continue negotiations–when their open opposition to Speaker of the House John Boehner’s “Plan B” last week helped doom that plan to defeat in the Republican caucus. House members were reluctant to vote for “Plan B” to begin with, since it would have raised some tax rates; the certainty that it would fail in the Senate made them even less enthusiastic.

Reid took to the floor of the Senate today to accuse Boehner of running a “dictatorship” in the House, poisoning the prospect of a bipartisan deal even further.

Prior to the failure of “Plan B,” House Republicans had offered several plans, starting with Boehner’s plan to raise $800 billion in revenues without raising tax rates. All were rejected by the White House and the Senate–which has not even passed a budget for three successive years, contrary to federal law.

While the President and the Senate leadership engage in a good cop-bad cop charade, the likely reality is that they have calculated that the “fiscal cliff” is bound to take place (and perhaps even suits their interests), and their sole focus is to convince the public that Republicans are to blame.

Given that President Obama’s call to McConnell was the first he had received in over a month from any Democrat on the issue, it is probably that going over the “fiscal cliff” was the President’s intent from the start.

Breitbart

“We can’t abandon constitutional rights for temporary security”

Comments Off on “We can’t abandon constitutional rights for temporary security”

Senator Michael S. Lee is disturbed by the reauthorization of the  FISA bill being able to search electronic communications of US Citizens WITHOUT a warrant as the 4th amendment calls for of the US government’s database of such.

“No one disputes that the government may have a legitimate need to search its FISA database for information about a US person. But there’s no legitimate reason why the government ought not first obtain a warrant by articulating and justifying the need for its intrusion on the privacy of a US person. Our constitutional values demand nothing less. Unfortunately, we won’t be voting on such an amendment today, so our reauthorization of FISA will include a grant of authority for the government to perform backdoor searches, seeking information on individual American citizens without a warrant. I believe such searches are inconsistent with fundamental Fourth Amendment principles.”

– Senator Michael S. Lee

Rand Paul offers amendment to protect emails and text messages from warrantless surveilance

Why We Should All Care About Today’s Senate Vote on the FISA Amendments Act, the Warrantless Domestic Spying Bill…from Electronic Frontier Foundation…

The good news is—thanks for your phone calls, emails, and tweets—Congress will now be forced to debate it, which means we can affect its outcome. In case you forget just how dangerous the FISA Amendments Act is to your privacy, here’s how we described it last week:

Flashback: Pres. Bill Clinton Asks For $60 Million For Cops In Schools

Comments Off on Flashback: Pres. Bill Clinton Asks For $60 Million For Cops In Schools

The Left mocked NRA president Wayne LaPierre call for armed police officers in schools, but the Left’s patron saint, Bill Clinton called for the exact same thing in 2000!

New criticism over call for armed police in schools

Bill Clinton said after the Columbine shootings:

Marking the first anniversary of the shooting deaths at Columbine High School, President Clinton announced $120 million in new federal grants Saturday to place more police officers in schools and help even the youngest kids cope with their problems.

“In our national struggle against youth violence we must not fail our children; our future depends on it,” the president said in his weekly radio address.

Western Journalism

The Bill of Rights is not negotiable – SHARE this urgent declaration

Comments Off on The Bill of Rights is not negotiable – SHARE this urgent declaration

There is a destructive, delusional meme spreading like a virus among many misguided Americans. It pushes the idea that government can pick and choose which rights codified in the Bill of Rights it wishes to recognize or discard on any given day.

This delusion is predicated on the concept that if a popular majority can be emotionally whipped into a frenzy over one particular right, then that right can simply be discarded and stricken from the Bill of Rights.

But no such power exists to discard any portion of the Bill of Rights, at least not without proper ratification by three-fourths of the fifty states. There is no such power found solely in the federal government. There is no such power placed solely in the executive branch, nor in Congress, nor in the White House.

The Bill of Rights describes a set of individual rights and liberties which are not granted by government, but recognized as DIVINE rights given to use by our Creator. Because government never granted the rights in the first place, it has no authority to take them away.

“The Framers of the Bill of Rights did not purport to “create” rights. Rather, they designed the Bill of Rights to prohibit our Government from infringing rights and liberties presumed to be preexisting.” – William J Brennan Jr.

The individual liberties described in the Bill of Rights cannot be infringed, nor deleted, nor overridden by popular opinion… not even loudly screamed opinion. America is not a nation ruled by the tyranny of the mob. It isn’t even a democracy — it’s a republic, where certain inalienable rights describe the protection of each individual, even if that individual is the lone voice of sanity in a majority gone mad. The Bill of Rights protects individuals from the tyranny of mob rule — a phenomenon that routinely rears its head in any society where historical illiteracy is rampant and the masses are lulled into a state of complacency by charismatic but dishonest leaders.

It was the extended amendments attached to the Bill of Rights that outlawed slavery, guaranteeing individual freedom to those of African descent even in a time and place when the majority of voting citizens believed slavery was socially acceptable. And it was the Second Amendment that put firearms into the hands of those recently-freed slaves, ensuring that they could defend themselves against attackers of any color through the powerful expression of armed defense (aided by the laws of physics and certain materials from the table of elements, notably lead).

Another amendment beyond the Bill of Rights granted women equal voting rights in an age when the majority believed women should not be allowed to vote. It was the Bill of Rights that decriminalized prohibition, ending a dark era of mass criminalization of everyday citizens who suffered under the oppression of government law enforcement gone bad.

Yet today, incredibly, many African-Americans and women are actively assaulting the very document that first secured their own freedoms. They now wish to take their freedom and power and use it to enslave someone else by revoking other people’s rights under the Bill of Rights. This is the ultimate social betrayal, and it is a powerful demonstration of the principle that those who do not respect freedom for others do not deserve it for themselves.

The Second Amendment is not negotiable

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms — much like the Right of Free Speech — is not negotiable. Its protections are not subject to the whims of majority opinion, nor the screaming demands of hyperventilating media personalities. All the social media trolls and opinion writers in the world can comment all they want on the Second Amendment, yet the individual right to keep and bear arms remains immutable.

Just like the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment is not negotiable. No Governor, Senator or President has any power whatsoever to banish the Second Amendment, and any who attempt to oppose it only brand themselves as criminal traitors to the United States of America. Any active effort to eradicate the Second Amendment outside of law — without going through the proper process of state ratification for Constitutional amendments — is, by definition, an act of sedition against the United States of America and its people.

Ironically, many who viciously attack the Second Amendment do so by invoking their free speech protections under the First Amendment. Yet they seem blind to the realization that the First Amendment itself is only made possible by the Second Amendment which balances power between the People and the government, ensuring that the individual right to bear arms serves as a check and balance against the monopoly of violence every government inherently seeks.

Disarmament of the populace is always the first step to depriving them of their civil rights and human rights. Without the right to bear arms, there is no right to free speech, no right to due process, no right to trial by jury and certainly no right to be secured against unreasonable search and seizure. A government with a monopoly of force is a government that respects no boundaries and honors no limits.

Grasping this point requires competent thinking, which is why so many who now flourish in America on the popularity of pop culture idiocy fail to understand it. It is intellectually lazy to blame gun rights for violence, requiring no depth of thought or reason. Only someone of higher awareness and possessing the aptitude for multi-layered thinking can realize the critical importance of distributed firepower in stopping government violence against the People. As Ron Paul recently said, “Government security is just another kind of violence.”

Ron Paul gets it. He understands that an imbalance of power in the hands of government inevitably leads to mass violence waged against the People. Those who are currently screaming for the population to be disarmed do not realize that in seeking to prevent one kind of violence (school shootings), they are unleashing a far more disastrous and horrifying violence by allowing the government to monopolize physical power over the citizens. This is a mistake that has been repeated throughout history, often at the cost of tens of millions of destroyed lives. Click here to watch my short video documentary that lays out these facts in more detail.

The Second Amendment was put in place precisely for the purpose of making sure that future Americans would not fall for the same mistake yet again. That’s why it is the second highest amendment, right after the right of free speech, indicating its crucial priority in the enumeration of sacred rights that must be protected at all costs.

Read more, this is a long article to post….Natural News

Piers Morgan Steps in it Again: Time for an ‘Amendment to the Bible’

Comments Off on Piers Morgan Steps in it Again: Time for an ‘Amendment to the Bible’

CNN’s Piers Morgan, who has come under fire for his vocal support of gun control and his strident opposition to gun enthusiasts, one of whom he denounced on his show as an “unbelievably stupid man,” has stepped in another hornet’s nest.

In an interview with evangelical pastor Rick Warren, Morgan asserted that the Bible, like the Constitution, is “basically inherently flawed” and that, with regard to gay rights in particular, “it’s time for an amendment to the Bible.” “I do not believe the Bible is flawed,” Warren responded. “What I believe is flawed is human opinion, because it constantly changes.” (Piers Morgan is obviously doing this on purpose, but it’s going to backfire and cost CNN even more loss of viewers.)

Morgan says that debate should not be disrespectful, discourteous, rude or poisonous. Great. Then he should have probably taken his own advice when he interviewed Larry Pratt

From Diane Feinstein: Stopping the spread of deadly assault weapons

Comments Off on From Diane Feinstein: Stopping the spread of deadly assault weapons

Flashback: Sen. Dianne Feinstein Has Conceal Carry Permit

Folks as Steve has said for a long time now,they are coming after the 2nd amendment, 1st with the assault weapons ban (semi-autos, which by the way could include shot guns, 30-06, 30-30s,etc. even 9mm,40 cals, 45 cals,50 cals, etc., because they’re all semi autos now)…then hand guns with the UN Small Arms Treaty to be taken up in 2013. A treaty as this is unconstitutional because a Treaty must be Constitutional as well. You can’t ban the 2nd amendment or any other amendment by Treaty as your being told. Do not forget: The federal government may not lawfully circumvent the U.S. Constitution by international treaties.  It may NOT do by Treaty what it is not permitted to do by the U.S. Constitution.

UN Small Arms Treaty

California Democrat Dianne Feinstein will introduce legislation in January calling for the fingerprinting and registering of all gun owners in the United States.

On her Senate web page, Feinstein states her proposed legislation will add fingerprinting and photo identification to the National Firearms Act.

A firearms seller must currently submit Form 4473 to the government containing the name, address, driver license information, NICS background check transaction number, serial number and model of the firearm, and a short federal affidavit stating that the purchaser is eligible to purchase firearms under federal law. Feinstein’s bill will add a substantial layer of bureaucracy to the existing regulations.

The effort to expand firearms registration will include weapons grandfathered prior to the enactment of Feinstein’s proposed legislation. In other words, all gun owners will be required to register their constitutionally guaranteed firearms with a federal government inimical to the Second Amendment.

Feinstein’s registration process will likely surpass New York City’s handgun permit process, which is a bureaucratic nightmare. In addition to non-refundable fees totaling over $500, the permit process demands two recent color photos, a birth certificate, proof of citizenship and residence, a blizzard of affidavits, and other red-tape hurdles. Applications are routinely denied for spurious reasons, including non-violent misdemeanors and depression.

As Dean Weingarten notes, gun registration is de facto gun confiscation. Following mandatory gun registration, the government “will know who has legal possession of each firearm. They will know where the firearm is stored. When physical possession of the gun is desired, they can order you to turn it in. This has happened repeatedly,” most notably in Nazi Germany, Red China and Soviet Russia.

More recently, it has occurred in Kosovo, Great Britain, Australia, New York, and California. If Feinstein has her way next month, it will happen across America.

Democrats and their Republican co-conspirators are going all out to ban firearms. Feinstein’s bill will ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of 120 specifically-named firearms, including semiautomatic rifles, handguns, and shotguns that can accept detachable and fixed magazines and have “one military characteristic.”

In addition, Feinstein’s bill will outlaw flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, thumbhole stocks and bullets buttons on firearms.

Make no mistake about it. Obama and his anti-Second Amendment allies in Congress are coming for your guns. If they have their way, the only legal firearms in America will be rifles with 10 round magazines and single shot and bolt-action rifles – and those firearms will be registered with the government and may be confiscated at any moment.

From Diane Feinstein’s website:

Stay informed

In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devises.

To receive updates on this legislation, click here.

Summary of 2013 legislation

Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:

  • Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
    • 120 specifically-named firearms
    • Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
    • Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds
  • Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
    • Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
    • Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test
    • Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans
  • Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
  • Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
    • Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
    • Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and
    • Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons
  • Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include: (Remember in all of history Gun Registration leads to Gun Confiscation….ALWAYS!…The historical examples include NAZI Germany, Soviet Russia, Red China, and Cambodia. Recent examples include Kosovo, Great Britian, Australia, New York, and California. Not having possession of the firearm registered to you can be grounds for criminal action. If you have reported the gun stolen, and it is then found in your possession, you can be charged with obstruction of justice.)
    • Background check of owner and any transferee;
    • Type and serial number of the firearm;
    • Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
    • Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
    • Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration

A pdf of the bill summary is available here.

Effectivenness of 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban

Following are studies that have been conducted on the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban:

Older Entries