-Gary
Democratic Official Admits Plan To Confiscate Guns – YouTube.
Mike Martinez of Austin, Texas publicly admits to long term Democrat goal to ban guns
1
Tag Archives: media
Just the right amount of arrogance, ignorance, and stupidity…
Diana DeGette displays the same sort of arrogance, ignorance, and stupidity toward a concerned citizen that she would attribute to Todd Akin with regard to rape.
That she displays such idiocy should not be a surprise. She is, after all, a politician. Worse, she’s a liberal Democrat who lives down to their reputation in this video. She not only completely dismisses her constituent’s concerns about self-defense, she mocks him saying, “Good news for you. You live in Denver. The DPD would be there in minutes.” But then she goes on to say, “you’d probably be dead anyway.” This is the true face of liberal Democrats when it comes to the issue of your right to defend yourself. She couldn’t have said it better if she were Marie Antoinette. Of course, at the same meeting, she goes on to demonstrate her complete ignorance on firearms with regard to the efficacy of magazine bans.
These are the kinds of people dictating laws and policies with regard to firearms…As if Joe Biden’s own stupidity and ignorance wasn’t enough. What’s worse? The media is complicit and in many cases, just as ignorant. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, we are in a war. We cannot pat ourselves on the back for every little battle. There is an outright cultural war going on right now and it’s not really about guns, drugs, religion, or race. It’s about control, period.
-Gary
Share this:
Knee-jerk legislation is never a good idea and NY is learning it the hard way…
So it seems that in the Democrat’s race to ban guns, they’ve come to realize they didn’t think things through in their effort to take advantage of a tragedy. First, it was a realization they didn’t codify a means by which police or military could retain their magazines. Then, Cuomo admits no one makes a seven-round magazine for most guns. And one can only guess the issue of constitutionality finally raised in the Democrat’s consciousness when they finally noticed that as written, even the 10-round magazines they said were grandfathered, couldn’t be legally sold, purchased, or manufactured in the state of New York once the law went into effect.
As a society, our nation has developed a habit of passing laws or enacting new policies in the name of everything that ever goes wrong or in the name anyone who dies. This needs to stop as it consistently leads to bad policy that is either not enforceable or completely counter productive, whether it be Prohibition, the “War on Drugs,” the Patriot Act, or banning guns. People need to grow up and realize that “shit happens” even when we do everything “right.” It is already illegal to kill people. You can’t make murder “more illegal” than it already is as murder tends to be a capital offense in most states. There’s little point in creating a maze of new laws that impact only law abiding citizens who are unlikely to commit murder in the first place.
-Gary
Share this:
A battle has been won for now but, the war rages on…
Assault weapons ban wont be in Dems gun bill – Yahoo! News.
Diane Feinstein’s nose has been bloodied. Her proposed ban has been dropped from the bill going to the Senate. However, it could still be revived as an amendment to bills that do go forward which include “universal” background checks and possible attempts at a national gun registry. As a community, we still need to keep up the pressure on Congress and our respective state legislatures.
-Gary
Share this:
Ted Cruz is earning his paycheck while defending our rights as the “junior” senator from Texas
Ted Cruz is earning his paycheck as a Senator from Texas. Earlier today, Cruz and Diane Feinstein squared off in the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting. Cruz, very respectfully addressed the Senior Senator from California (Feinstein) and directly asked if she believed her current endeavor would be consistent with the context of the Bill of Rights if applied to the 1st Amendment only applied to those books Congress deemed OK or the 4th Amendment applying only to those individuals Congress saw fit to protect.
In response, Feinstein declared, “…I’m not a sixth grader.” The only thing she didn’t say was “look here you little whippersnapper…I’ve been doing this since you were in grade school.” But most importantly, she said the following, “…I’m not a lawyer. But after 20 years, I’ve been up close and personal with the Constitution. I have great respect for it. This doesn’t mean that weapons of war… And the Heller decision, clearly points out three exceptions. Two of which, are pertinent here…”
The three exceptions she’s talking about appear on pages 54 and 55 of the official opinion of the Supreme Court in D.C. v .Heller. Specifically, the Court stated, “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
Now it is obvious that Feinstein plans to work under the premise that “laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms…” would be deemed Constitutional in the eyes of the Supreme Court. But, let me muddy the water even more with a caveat or footnote regarding the exceptions discussed above. This footnote appears at the bottom of page 55 and reads as follows, “We identify these presumptively lawful regulatory measures only as examples; our list does not purport to be exhaustive.” My suspicion is the Feinstein and others see this as wiggle room providing the regulatory authority to ban standard capacity magazines and semi-auto firearms.
The Court’s opinion goes on to state, “We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” This part of the opinion, in theory and in the opinions of many legal experts, should protect standard capacity magazines and semi-auto firearms specifically because they are in “common use” for lawful purposes. The problem we face is that Congress could readily pass a ban anyway. Feinstein and others argue that semi-auto firearms and standard capacity magazines are NOT in common use for lawful purposes, or else Biden wouldn’t be telling you to go get a double-barrel shotgun. This is where calling your representative or senator becomes so important to preventing such a ban from becoming law. Because if it does, like the D.C. and Chicago handgun bans, it will have to go to the Supreme Court to be struck down or a new Congress would have to repeal it. Neither of these are easy roads and a great deal of damage will be done while the laws are in place. As the old saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
-Gary