Police told to choose: Gun control or Constitution

2 Comments

Folks to ban the 2nd amendment, you must have 2/3 of Congress approve it, then 3/4 of the States ratify that amendment, just as they did when they repealed “prohibition”.

“This is a message to every member of law enforcement and the military,” a sizzling new YouTube video begins. “You know you have a choice to make.”

The video, produced by a man identified on Facebook as Aaron Hawkins, is a challenge to those who enforce America’s laws, warning them the day is coming when gun-control legislation will undermine the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment and police forces will be asked to restrict or even confiscate American citizens’ firearms.

On that day, the video warns, America’s lawmakers will have committed “treason,” and the nation’s police and military will be forced to choose “which side of history you’re going to be on.”

The video, titled “Police & Military – Time to Choose,” cites alleged offenses already enacted against the Constitution from both current and past presidential administrations, including the Patriot Act – which expanded the federal government’s use of domestic security and surveillance powers – and the National Defense Authorization Act – which many worry opens the door to indefinite detention of American citizens without trial.

“At this juncture in history, there can be no question that those holding the reins of power in Congress and the Senate and in the executive branch no longer represent the rule of law,” the video continues, “By destroying the Constitution with the Patriot Act and the NDAA and numerous other police-state measures, they have abandoned every shred of legitimacy and have made themselves into enemies of the people.”

Hawkins, who administers a site called StormCloudsGathering.com, paints the picture in stark terms, but says he hopes principled police and military will rather refuse to enforce the laws than permit a conflict over firearms turn to civil war.

Hawkins’ video ends with an appeal to support Oathkeepers.org, which describes itself as “a non-partisan association of currently serving military, veterans, peace officers and firefighters who will fulfill the oath we swore to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God. Our oath is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and we will not obey unconstitutional (and thus illegal) and immoral orders, such as orders to disarm the American people.”

Though there is no indication the organization endorses Hawkins’ video, a similar call to choose the Constitution over gun-control legislation does appear on the Oath Keepers’ website from a New Jersey police officer identified as Oathkeeper151:

Oathkeeper151 includes in his call to fellow police officers a challenge similar to Hawkins, reminding them that laws are only as enforceable as those willing to enforce them.

“If [we] law enforcement officials and military remembered our oaths,” the Oath Keeper states, “[gun-grabbing legislators] wouldn’t be able to do anything.”

Worldnet Daily

STUDY: What Are the Most, Least Free States in the United States?

Comments Off

A new study by a Libertarian think tank called the Mercatus Center at George Mason University ranks the 50 states in order of personal freedoms. There’s a chart on the website, that I couldn’t transfer here.

A new study by a Libertarian think tank called the Mercatus Center at George Mason University ranks the 50 states in order of personal freedoms. So, how does your state stack up? Judge Andrew Napolitano reveals that the most free states are North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and New Hampshire. The least free are New York, New Jersey, California, Hawaii, and Rhode Island.

The study determined the rankings based on “the laws that the states impose that regulate personal, private behavior.”

According to Napolitano the results of the study are mixed. “The bad news is that there are states like New York, New York City, where the government thinks it can regulate private behavior. The good news is, as Ronald Reagan used to say, you can still vote with your feet. If you think the taxes are too high in New Jersey, you can move to Pennsylvania.”

Fox Insider

 

Intruder shot dead at home of rural Colorado prosecutor

Comments Off

And they want to take the law abiding citizen’s gun away from them. Let’s start with these  type guys, that away their guns first how bout it. Then how would they feel when that intrudere comes knocking on their door?

DENVER (Reuters) – An intruder who forced his way into the mountain home of a Colorado deputy district attorney was shot dead by either the prosecutor or her police officer husband, authorities said on Tuesday.

The shooting, shortly before midnight Monday, comes two weeks after Colorado’s prisons director was slain as he answered the front door to his home, and two days after the district attorney of Kaufman County in Texas was found shot to death with his wife.

An assistant prosecutor in the Kaufman County district attorney’s office was shot to death on January 31, and authorities have said both Texas murders and the March 19 slaying of Colorado prisons chief Tom Clements appeared to be targeted killings rather than random acts of violence.

In light of the three previous cases, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation is leading the probe into the latest shooting, which occurred in Hot Sulphur Springs, about 95 miles northwest of Denver.

“There are no apparent ties to recent shootings; however, investigators continue to pursue all possible leads and background information on this (dead) person,” the bureau said in a written statement.

Authorities did not immediately release the names of the deputy prosecutor and her husband in connection with Monday night’s shooting.

The deputy district attorney made a 911 emergency call and reported that a man was at her door “behaving very erratically,” police said.

The prosecutor then told dispatchers that the stranger forced his way into her home. An altercation ensued inside and shots were fired, leaving the unidentified man dead, police said.

A spokeswoman for one of the agencies investigating the incident told Reuters that the prosecutor and her husband, himself a sheriff’s deputy, both fired at the intruder, but it is too early in the probe to know who fired the fatal shot.

The Colorado prosecutor and her husband both suffered minor injuries and have been placed on paid leave pending the results of the investigation.

Read more

Obama Demands Sheriffs Enforce Gun Bans

Comments Off

It appears we’re in deep trouble folks. Obama has NO authority over your local Sheriff. None!

sheriff joe arpaio 300x222 Obama Demands Sheriffs Enforce Gun Bans

“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” Though Chief Justice John Marshall’s decision in the landmark case Marbury vs Madison has led to two centuries of power-abusing mischief on the part of our federal government, he did have the premise correct—a law which is unconstitutional is not a law at all. What he did not add, but might have I suspect, is that such a “law” need not be followed and should not be enforced, especially not by those who have sworn an oath to uphold and defend that Constitution.

For months the American people have been threatened with legislation promoting gun confiscation, “assault weapons” bans and schemes which would lead quite inevitably to the national registration of firearms and their owners. New York and Colorado have already enacted such legislation, all in typical leftist, knee-jerk response to the Newtown killings.

Each new piece of gun control legislation proposed by the left, whether at the state or national level, has one thing in common—an utter disregard for the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. But while our would-be masters have been scheming to disarm the American people, sheriffs across the nation have proudly made it clear that “…they will not enforce federal or state gun laws they consider unconstitutional.” (2)

In fact, 28 of 29 Utah sheriffs wrote directly to Barack Obama announcing their position on federal gun control legislation:

”We, like you swore a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and we are prepared to trade our lives for the preservation of its traditional interpretation.” (3)

To which they added:

“Make no mistake, as the duly-elected sheriffs of our respective counties, we will enforce the rights guaranteed to our citizens by the Constitution. No federal official will be permitted to descend upon our constituents and take from them what the Bill of Rights-in particular Amendment II-has given them.” (3)

Of course, our Muslim Monarch has different ideas. “I think as a general proposition we think that people ought to follow the law,” (that is, whatever WE proclaim the law to be) commented White House Press Secretary Jay Carney when told that nearly 500 sheriffs nationwide have sworn to uphold the Constitution and NOT the gun control agenda of Barack Obama. Yet according to the Regime, local officials should simply do what the federal government tells them to do and not worry about how legal or constitutional it might be.

Obama has already informed states which have refused to implement ObamaCare that the federal government would be taking over all health insurance operations and decisions within their borders. Does anyone imagine the most corrupt and thuggish administration in the nation’s history would do any less upon the passage of federal gun control legislation? (4)

The Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot force states to “enforce or enact federal law.” (5) Naturally the Obama Regime will ignore these inconvenient rulings as it demands local officials do what they are told while threatening any who resist.

Strange, isn’t it, that this administration sued Arizona for its desire to enforce federal immigration law, yet now demands that states enforce the provisions of the affordable Care Act and will no doubt do the same should decidedly unconstitutional, federal gun control legislation become the law of the land!

Western Journalism

Democrat openly admits Assault Weapons ban only the beginning-handguns next

Comments Off

So you thought it would stop at “assault weapons” ban…..Wrong ! The Dems are just going to ignore the 2nd amendment and go for it all, thinking the SCOTUS will uphold it.

A new video released by conservative activist Jason Mattera will surely have gun rights advocates up in arms. In an exchange with Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) that was caught on camera last month but only released Monday, the Democratic politician spoke openly about her gun control views, noting that current proposals are only the beginning.

Perhaps the most contentious portion of the dialogue, which purportedly took place at a women’s rights rally, is the section in which she seems to indicate that a much larger push against firearms could inevitably take aim at handguns.

At the beginning of the exchange, Mattera identifies himself but tells Schakowsky that he “appreciated her remarks” (he does not indicate his conservative worldview and she appears not to recognize him). Considering these tactics, his introduction potentially gained her trust, leading the congresswoman to candidly share her views. He also repeatedly addressed her using “we” and it appears as though Schakowsky doesn’t realize she’s being recorded.

“I was wondering, is it time we have a serious conversation not just about assault rifles, but about handguns as well?,” Mattera asked.

“Well, that’s why if we have universal background checks, that will effect every single kind of weapon,” she replied. “The Brady Campaign thinks that of all the things that have been suggested, this may actually be the thing that does the most to prevent gun violence.”

The congressional leader went on to say that there is a “moment of opportunity” and that political leaders are “going to push as hard as we can and as far as we can.” When Mattera then noted that most gun deaths are the result of handguns and questioned why addressing those type of firearms isn’t currently on the table, Schakowsky was candid, later adding that she’s personally opposed to handguns.

“We’re not going to be able to win that — not now,” she said. “But background checks I think are going to, you know, address any kind of weapon.”

Mattera, again, pushed handguns as a point of conversation, noting that a full-throttle ban could never be secured, considering the Second Amendment’s current wording.

“I don’t know. I don’t know that we can’t,” Schakowsky said, going on to note that some municipalities in her district have banned handguns, seemingly driving home the point that there is support among select cohorts for more restrictive measures in this arena. ”I don’t think it’s precluded.”

The Blaze

UPDATE: School Offers Counseling for Students Troubled by Pastry-Gun Incident

Comments Off

You just can’t make this stuff up…..can things get any more stupid or ridiculous. I mean common sense when it comes to guns of any kind seems to out the window. It’s insanity on steroids it seems.

As you know if you have been following this dramatic story unfolding in Brooklyn Park, Maryland, seven-year-old Josh Welch has been suspended for two days after he allegedly fashioned his breakfast pastry into the shape of a gun.

Did I say “dramatic”? I meant “stupid.”

The elementary school that was the scene of Josh’s brutally harmless rampage sent students home Friday with a letter describing the incident as if it had actually been serious:

Dear Parents and Guardians:

I am writing to let you know about an incident that occurred this morning in one of our classrooms and encourage you to discuss this matter with your child in a manner you deem most appropriate.

During breakfast this morning, one of our students used food to make inappropriate gestures that disrupted the class. While no physical threats were made and no one [was] harmed, the student had to be removed from the classroom.

As you are aware, the … Code of Student Conduct and appropriate consequences related to violations of the code are clearly spelled out in the Student Handbook, which was sent home during the first week of school and can be found on our website, http://www.aacps.org….

If your children express that they are troubled by today’s incident, please talk with them and help them share their feelings. Our school counselor is available to meet with any students who have the need to do so next week. In general, please remind them of the importance of making good choices.

Pretty sure that if your children are “troubled” by another kid biting a pastry into something that looks sort of like a gun and waving said pastry around, you have already failed as a parent.

The two-day suspension indicates that the school considered this a “Level 3″ violation, but exactly what part of the Code was in play is not clear. The letter suggests Josh disrupted the class, but the reference to “inappropriate gestures” involving food can only mean he was also charged with a pastry-based-weapons violation. The Code defines “other weapons” as:

Any gun of any kind, loaded or unloaded, operable or inoperable, including any object other than a firearm which is a look-a-like of a gun. This shall include, but is not limited to, pellet gun, paintball gun, stun gun, taser, BB gun, flare gun, nail gun, and air soft gun.

Josh’s gun was not a firearm, because it was a pastry, and it seems highly unlikely that it qualified as a gun “look-a-like,” again because it was a pastry. It certainly is nothing like any of the “look-a-like” items set forth in the list, largely because those items are not pastries.

Josh’s father expressed amazement at the school’s reaction to the incident, which involved a pastry.

“I’ll just call it insanity,” Josh’s father said. “It’s a pastry.”

Powerful NRA Ad: Stand & Fight, Politicians Work for Us

Comments Off

CA Police Chief: Guns Are Not a Defensive Weapon

Comments Off

Unbelievable that a Police Chief would say this…..

CA Police Chief Ken James says that the idea that guns are a defensive weapon is a myth.

65% See Gun Rights As Protection Against Tyranny

1 Comment

Two-out-of-three Americans recognize that their constitutional right to own a gun was intended to ensure their freedom. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 65% of American Adults think the purpose of the Second Amendment is to make sure that people are able to protect themselves from tyranny. Only 17% disagree, while another 18% are not sure. (To see survey question wording,click here .) Not surprisingly, 72% of those with a gun in their family regard the Second Amendment as a protection against tyranny.

However, even a majority (57%) of those without a gun in their home hold that view. Many gun control advocates talk of the right to gun ownership as relating to hunting and recreational uses only. While there are often wide partisan differences of opinion on gun-related issues, even 54% of Democrats agree with 75% of Republicans and 68% of those not affiliated with either major party that the right to own a gun is to ensure such freedom.

As Americans search for answers to the Newtown shooting, attitudes on gun ownership are “not likely to change in a nation where six out of 10 adults would rather live in a neighborhood where they can own a gun and most would feel safer if their children attended a school with an armed security guard.” Scott Rasmussen explains in his latest weekly newspaper column  that if Congress is “not willing to go as far as the president wants on gun control, perhaps they… might take stronger action on mental health issues or increase the penalties for crimes committed with a gun.” In the wake of last month’s horrific elementary school massacre in Connecticut, 51% favor stricter gun control laws . There is strong support for background checks of gun owners , but a plurality believes dealing with mental health issues will lead to more effective results

. Fifty-nine percent (59%) think Congress and President Obama are likely to create stricter gun control laws.

Read article

White House weighs broad gun-control agenda in wake of Newtown shootings

Comments Off

Well here we go folks…a complete violation of the 2nd amendment…….remember registration of guns is ALWAYS followed at sometime in the future by confiscation of those guns registered.

We also have: FLASHBACK: Obama: I Will NOT Take Your Guns Away

The White House is weighing a far broader and more comprehensive approach to curbing the nation’s gun violence than simply reinstating an expired ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition, according to multiple people involved in the administration’s discussions.

A working group led by Vice President Biden is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks, and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors, the sources said.

To sell such changes, the White House is developing strategies to work around the National Rifle Association that one source said could include rallying support from Wal-Mart and other gun retailers for measures that would benefit their businesses. White House aides have also been in regular contact with advisers to New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), an outspoken gun-control advocate who could emerge as a powerful surrogate for the Obama administration’s agenda.

The Biden group, formed last month after the massacre at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school that killed 20 children and six adults, plans to submit a package of recommendations to President Obama this month. Once Obama’s proposals are set, he plans to lead a public-relations offensive to generate popular support.

“They are very clearly committed to looking at this issue comprehensively,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, who has been involved in the discussions. The proposals under consideration, he added, are “a deeper exploration than just the assault-weapons ban.”

The gun-control push is just one part of an ambitious political agenda that Obama has pledged to pursue after his decisive reelection victory in November, including comprehensive immigration reform, climate-change legislation and long-term deficit reduction. Obama also faces a reshuffling of his Cabinet, and a looming debate over the nation’s debt ceiling that will compete for his time and attention in the coming months.

Seeking expansive mandate

In addition to potential legislative proposals, Biden’s group has expanded its focus to include measures that would not need congressional approval and could be quickly implemented by executive action, according to interest-group leaders who have discussed options with Biden and key Cabinet secretaries. Possibilities include changes to federal mental-health programs and modernization of gun-tracking efforts by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

“Simply coming up with one or two aspects of it really falls short of the magnitude of the gun issue in the country,” said Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum.

Wexler was among a dozen law enforcement leaders who met with Biden and other administration leaders in the aftermath of the Dec. 14 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. The Dec. 20 summit, which stretched an hour beyond an allotted one hour, included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., Education Secretary Arne Duncan, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Biden “wanted to talk to us about the assault-weapons ban, automatic weapons, high-capacity magazines,” said Hennepin County (Minn.) Sheriff Richard Stanek, president of the Major County Sheriffs’ Association.

The vice president said the White House group would consider a variety of proposals — from requiring background checks for all gun buyers to creating a new database that would allow the ATF to track all gun sales, according to participants.

Stanek said the meeting also included significant discussion of mental-health issues, violence in video games and movies, and the poor quality of information contained in databases used to conduct criminal background checks before issuing gun permits.

Some of the options the administration is considering may not ultimately be included in Obama’s package. A White House spokesman said Biden’s group was in the midst of its review and has made no decisions on its final recommendations.

The White House is also developing strategies to navigate the rocky and emotionally fraught terrain of gun politics once final policy decisions are made. The administration is quietly talking with a diverse array of interest groups, including religious leaders, mental-health professionals and hunters, to build as broad a coalition as possible, those involved in the discussions said.

The president is expected to face fierce opposition from the NRA and its allies in Congress, including most Republicans and some Democrats.

But Biden signaled to those involved in the policy discussions that the White House is not afraid of taking on the NRA, the nation’s largest gun rights group. At the Dec. 20 meeting, according to Stanek, when one law enforcement leader suggested focusing on only the most popular proposals, Biden responded: “Look, what I’m asking you for is your candid opinion and ideas about extreme gun violence. Leave the politics to the president. That’s our job with Congress.”

NRA officials declined a request for comment. In response to the shooting in Newtown, Wayne LaPierre, the group’s executive vice president, called for installing armed police officers in every school.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre said at a news conference Dec. 21.

One potential strategy would be to win support for specific measures from interest groups that are normally aligned with the NRA, according to one person who works closely with the administration on gun-related issues and who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity.

For instance, this person suggested, Wal-Mart and other major gun retailers may have an incentive to support closing a loophole that allows people to bypass background checks if they purchase firearms at gun shows or through other types of private sales. That could result in more people buying guns in retail stores.

Timing is imperative

Obama’s advisers have calculated that the longer they wait, the more distance there is from the Newtown massacre and the greater the risk that the bipartisan political will to tackle gun violence will dissipate.

“This is not something that I will be putting off,” Obama said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” in an interview broadcast last Sunday.

At the White House meeting, Stanek said, “the vice president indicated that there was a very short timeline for him to get back to the president with his recommendations because the American public has a short memory.”

Already, three weeks after the Newtown shooting, gun-control advocates are growing impatient with a legislative process that is just beginning.

“As we get involved in these ad nauseam debates over the Second Amendment, our children are still at risk,” said Jon Adler, national president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. “Debating is not the action verb we need to protect our children.”

Continue reading

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 396 other followers