Archive for the ‘Editorial, Opinion’ Category

Iran… How times change

June 19, 2009

I happen to be from that part of America that didn’t know about all the Tom Foolery that was engaged in by my nation and the Shaw of Iran. I am however very well aware of when our embassy was seized, and as the MSM at the time called it; “America held Hostage.”

I also remember the “Coward in Chiefs” utter failure as a leader in responding to the threat. I remember gross inflation, and the government telling us that unemployment was only six percent, when in fact it was a lot closer to twenty…

Now, an incident occurred in the Denver area. Some Iranian expatriates were assaulted, and treated pretty badly. One of the people that encouraged and approved of what had happened screamed about the “Damned Muslims…” Want to know the really sad part about this? They were Iranian refugees that were Christians that had escaped from Iran. From “Arab Muslim” persecution according to Rani. These were not illegal immigrants, not at all.

The United States of America is a nation built upon beliefs and people. The beliefs are the same, and the peoples are many. We come from Ireland, and Scotland, England and Africa, China and Viet Nam, and anywhere else you could choose to look.

Now, while even Pravda has pointed out where America is heading, the people of Iran are rising up.

How times change…

Rogue Agency at it again!

June 19, 2009

After all these years, they are still just a rogue agency.

NRA-ILA has recently received several calls from NRA members in border states who have been visited or called by agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In some cases, agents have asked to enter these people’s homes, and requested serial numbers of all firearms the members possess.

In each case, the agents were making inquiries based on the number of firearms these NRA members had recently bought, and in some cases the agents said they were asking because the members had bought types of guns that are frequently recovered in Mexico.

This kind of questioning may or may not be part of a legitimate criminal investigation. For example, when BATFE traces a gun seized after use in a crime, manufacturers’ and dealers’ records will normally lead to the first retail buyer of that gun, and investigators will have to interview the buyer to find out how the gun ended up in criminal hands. But in other cases, the questioning may simply be based on information in dealers’ records, with agents trying to “profile” potentially suspicious purchases.

On the other hand, some of the agents have used heavy-handed tactics. One reportedly demanded that a gun owner return home early from a business trip, while another threatened to “report” an NRA member as “refusing to cooperate.” That kind of behavior is outrageous and unprofessional.

Whether agents act appropriately or not, concerned gun owners should remember that all constitutional protections apply. Answering questions in this type of investigation is generally an individual choice. Most importantly, there are only a few relatively rare exceptions to the general Fourth Amendment requirement that law enforcement officials need a warrant to enter a home without the residents’ consent. There is nothing wrong with politely, but firmly, asserting your rights.

If BATFE contacts you and you have any question about how to respond, you may want to consult a local attorney. NRA members may also call NRA-ILA’s Office of Legislative Counsel at (703) 267-1161 for further information. Whether contacting a local attorney or NRA, be sure to provide as many details as possible, including the date, time, and location, agent’s name, and specific questions asked.

We the people are coming

June 19, 2009

Hat tip to Anthony for pointing this piece out. I think that it sums up pretty nicely what a lot of Americans are feeling right now, and those Americans are from across the political spectrum.

I’m a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me.

Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you’re willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?

Well, these are briefly my views and issues for which I seek representation:

One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. P.S., I’m not a racist. This isn’t to be confused with legal immigration.

Two, the TARP bill, I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you no, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.

Three: Czars, I want the circumvention of our checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution and honor it.

Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There is more to say.

Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision. Don’t you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night and then go on break. Slow down!

Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real obligations. Why don’t you start there.

Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes. Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census over with our taxpayer money. I don’t trust them with our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.

Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs. That is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person. Why do you want me to hate my employers? Why ‑‑ what do you have against shareholders making a profit?

Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.

Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we’ll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. Have you ever ripped off a Band‑Aid? We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.

Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let’s have it. Let’s say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk. Please try ‑‑ please stop manipulating and trying to appease me with clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.

Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.

Take a breath. Listen to the people. Let’s just slow down and get some input from some non-politicians on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed reading our bills into law.

I am not an activist. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I’m busy. I’m busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.

I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course.

What happened?

You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not. It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance.

Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is such urgency and recklessness in all of the recent spending.

From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us.

We want our voice back.

You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on you to bring our concerns to Washington.

Our president often knows all the right buzzword[s and the latest] is ‘unsustainable’. Well, no kidding! How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don’t want your overpriced words.

Stop treating us like we’re morons.

We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you—not for long—because we are coming.

We will be heard and we will be represented. You think we’re so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work, pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone and we are now looking up at you.

You have awakened us, the patriotic spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust.

We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office. We have cancelled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish.

We didn’t ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us when hewill rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.

Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don’t care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution and that is all that matters to us now.

We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back.

We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired.

Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you.

If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are.

If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one.

We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do you represent? Listen. Because we are coming.

We the people are coming.

SOURCE

Ted Kennedy Bill Could Send Your Gun Info Into A Massive Federal Database

June 18, 2009

More “Laird it over” from the Kennedy clan…

Ted Kennedy Bill Could Send Your Gun Info Into A Massive Federal
Database
-- And you could be forced to spend $13,000 of your own money toward
this effort!

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

At long last, Teddy Kennedy has partially revealed the health care
system he wants to foist on the whole country -- and it isn't pretty.

It won't be pretty for your pocket book... OR FOR YOUR GUN RIGHTS!

But first, let us explain what TeddyCare is all about.

At the center of the plan is what's called a "universal 
mandate." What
this means is that you -- and virtually everyone in the country -- will
have to buy as much health insurance as the government demands, and that
insurance plan will actually have to be approved by the government.

If you work for a small business, the business will buy the insurance on
your behalf. But you may be saddled with an enormous part of the cost.
And, if the employer's contribution is too large, you will be fired.

If you fail to buy TeddyCare, as the government orders you to do, the
IRS will fine you, garnish your wages, put a lien on your house, and,
ultimately, put you in prison.

How much will you have to spend on your TeddyCare insurance? Teddy's not
saying.

The portion of your paycheck that will have to be forked over to Teddy's
latest social experiment will be revealed ONLY AFTER THE MASSIVE HEALTH
CARE BILL IS SIGNED INTO LAW.

This should set off alarm bells in your brain, because, for instance,
the average family policy is currently $12,700.  "So," 
proclaims Teddy,
"everyone's going to get a subsidy to pay for this."  There's 
going to
be a "chicken in every pot," and no one's going to have to 
pay for it.

Yeah, right. If you're a welfare mother, the government will pay for
your TeddyCare, and it would pay for it -- the first time -- by taxing
employer-provided health benefits of working Americans. But if you a
"working Joe" your Kennedy-subsidy will be a microscopic 
fraction of the
cost of your mandated TeddyCare insurance policy.

Okay, all of this sounds ominous... but why is this a gun issue?

The answer is that TeddyCare will allow radical left Health and Human
Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to determine all of the fine print
in every TeddyCare policy -- which you will be required to buy under
penalty of imprisonment.

Currently, as a result of the stimulus bill and a whole lot of other
factors, the government is rapidly moving in the direction of
computerizing all of your most confidential medical records and putting
them into a federal database.

So remember when your son was asked by his pediatrician about your gun
collection? That would be in the federal database.

Or remember when your wife told her gynecologist that she had regularly
smoked marijuana ten years ago -- thereby potentially barring both her
and you from ever owning a gun again? That would be in the database.

Or if a military veteran complains to his psychiatrist that he's had
emotional stress since coming back to the States, that would be in the
database.

Or remember when gramps was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, thereby making
him a "mental defective" who would have to relinquish his 
life-long gun
collection? That's in there too.

And, while we are dangerously close to allowing BATFE to troll all of
that information, TeddyCare would allow Sebelius to put EVERYONE'S
private data in a database with a stroke of a pen.

When we say "everyone," we don't mean quite everyone.

Teddy has conveniently excluded Washington bureaucrats from his
TeddyCare mandate.

Also, Teddy and his friends in the media don't want you to hear about
the details until after the bill is passed. That's why they're trying to
slam it through within the next month and a half before anyone's had a
chance to read or debate it.

In fact, the TeddyCare proposal is currently circulating around Capitol
Hill without even a bill number.

ACTION:  Urge your two U.S. Senators to oppose Sen. Ted Kennedy's
mandate that will result in the registration of all your gun
information.

Please forward this email to your friends and family and urge them to
contact their Senators as well.

You can go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the
pre-written e-mail message below.

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

At long last, Teddy Kennedy has partially revealed the health care
system he wants to foist on the whole country -- and it isn't pretty.

At the center of the TeddyCare plan is what's called a "universal
mandate." What this means is that I -- and virtually everyone in the
country -- will have to buy as much health insurance as the government
demands, and that insurance plan will actually have to be approved by
the government.

But this is not only an issue of individual freedom; it is a gun issue.

This is because Teddycare will allow radical left Health and Human
Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to determine all of the fine print
in every Teddycare policy -- which Americans will be required to buy
under penalty of imprisonment.

Currently, as a result of the stimulus bill and a whole lot of other
factors, the government is rapidly moving in the direction of
computerizing all of our most confidential medical records and putting
them into a federal database.

So if a kid is asked by his pediatrician about his dad's gun collection,
that would be in the federal database.

Or if a wife told her gynecologist that she had regularly smoked
marijuana ten years ago -- thereby potentially barring both her and her
husband from ever owning a gun again, that would be in the database.

Or if a military veteran complains to his psychiatrist that he's had
emotional stress since coming back from Iraq or Afghanistan, that would
be in the database.

Or when gramps was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, thereby making him a
"mental defective" who would have to relinquish his life-long gun
collection, that would be in there too.

And, while we are dangerously close to allowing BATFE to troll all of
that information, TeddyCare would allow Sebelius to put EVERYONE'S
private data in a database with a stroke of a pen.

You cannot imagine how angry I, my family, and my neighbors are about
this most recent fraud scheme to cheat me out of perhaps over $10,000
for TeddyCare -- and to violate my privacy in the process.

I insist that you oppose TeddyCare -- immediately and loudly. Please do
not try to shower me with propaganda about how a mandate on how I spend
my own money is somehow good for me.

Sincerely,

While Mark is away…

June 18, 2009

No, the mice won’t play. But you can find some top notch commentary at

Visit The Patriot’s Opinion Page

Mark Alexander is away participating in a strategy symposium at the Naval War College this week. In his absence, we invite you to read this week’s best columns on The Patriot’s opinion page:

Deal between NRA leadership and Democrats leaves most Republicans in the dark

June 14, 2009

McCarthy Bill Rammed Through The House

Sunday, 14 June 2009 00:00

— Deal between NRA leadership and Democrats leaves most Republicans in the dark

Wednesday started out as a routine day in the U.S. Congress, with Representatives attending congressional hearings, meeting with constituents, perhaps devising clever new ways to pick our pockets.

At 8:30 in the morning an email went out to House Republicans indicating that a gun control bill, recently introduced by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), was on the Suspension Calendar (normally reserved for “non-controversial” bills).

Many Representatives didn’t see that email until it was too late. Less than three hours later, the bill passed by a voice vote. The bill in question, H.R. 2640, is a massive expansion of the Brady Gun Control law, the subject of many previous alerts by Gun Owners of America.

Its passage in the House is a case study in backroom deal making, unholy alliances and deceit. A sausage factory in a third world country with no running water has nothing on today’s U.S. Congress.

The Washington Post reported earlier this week that a deal had been struck between the NRA leadership and Democrat leaders in the House. The headline read: “Democrats, NRA Reach Deal on Background-Check Bill.”

Red flags went up throughout the pro-gun community. Who was party to this “deal,” and how many of our rights were being used as bargaining chips?

The McCarthy bill, at the time, looked to be going nowhere. The general consensus among pro-gun Congressmen was that any gun bill offered by McCarthy was simply DOA.

After all, if there were such a thing as a single issue Member of Congress, it would have to be McCarthy. Rep. McCarthy ran for office to ban guns; Hollywood made a movie about her efforts to ban guns; and she is currently the lead sponsor of a bill that makes the old Clinton gun ban pale by comparison.

Even many Democrats wouldn’t go near a McCarthy gun bill. They have learned that supporting gun control is a losing issue. Enter Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), the so-called Dean of the House, having served since the Eisenhower administration. Dingell is also a former NRA Board member, and was in that capacity tapped to bring the NRA leadership to the table.

The end result of the negotiations was that this small clique among the NRA leadership gave this bill the support it needed to pass.

But why was it necessary to pass the bill in such an underhanded fashion? If this is such a victory for the Second Amendment, why all the secrecy? Why was a deal forged with the anti-gun Democrat House leadership, keeping most pro-gun representatives in the dark? Why was the bill rammed through on the Suspension Calendar with no recorded vote with which to identify those who are against us?

For starters, it would be a hard sell indeed for the NRA leadership to explain to its members what they would gain by working with McCarthy. If this legislation had gone before the NRA membership for a vote, it would have been rejected. For that matter, if it went through the House in the regular fashion, with committee hearings and recorded votes, it would have been defeated.

Consider also what the bill is: GUN CONTROL! The lead sentence in an Associated Press article accurately stated that, “The House Wednesday passed what could become the first major federal gun control law in over a decade.”

The bill’s supporters can talk all they want to the contrary, but forcing the states to hand over to the federal government millions of records of Americans for the purpose of conducting a background check is certainly an expansion of gun control.

This is a bill designed to make the gun control trains run on time. Problem is, the train’s on the wrong track. We don’t need greater efficiency enforcing laws that for years we have fought as being unconstitutional.

Sure, there are provisions in the bill by which a person who is on the prohibited persons list can get his name removed, but not before proving one’s innocence before a court, or convincing a psychiatrist that he should be able to own a gun (though most psychiatrists would be more likely to deem a person mentally defective for even wanting to own guns).

Sad thing is, this bill, which spends hundreds of millions of your dollars, will do nothing to make us safer. More gun control laws will not stop the next deranged madman. What will stop a killer is an armed law-abiding citizen. In the wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy, we should be considering removing barriers that prevent honest, decent people from carrying their lawfully possessed firearms.

We don’t know where the next shooting will occur; that’s something the killer decides. So whether it is in a school, a church, a shopping mall or a government building, we should urge our elected officials to repeal so-called gun free zones and oppose more gun control.

Instead, we end up with a bill supported by Handgun Control and Sarah Brady, Chuck Schumer, Teddy Kennedy, Carolyn McCarthy, and the rest of the Who’s Who of the anti-gun movement, and all the while the NRA leadership maintains that this is a win for gun owners.

This is a Faustian bargain, which will repeatedly haunt gun owners in the years to come.

But you should realize why they had to do it this way. Your activism has resulted in an avalanche of grassroots opposition against this bill. Gun owners have raised their voices of opposition loud-and-clear, and many congressmen have been feeling the heat.

The fight is not over. They still have to run this through the Senate. Already, there is a small cadre of pro-gun senators who are ready to slow this bill down and do everything they can to kill it. To be frank, a bill that has the support of all the anti-gun groups and the NRA will be tough to beat, but we will continue to fight every step of the way.

Although we’ve suffered a setback, we want to thank all of you for the hard work you’ve done. Your efforts derailed the McCarthy bill for the past five years and we would have prevailed again were it not for the developments described above.

Be looking for an upcoming alert to the U.S. Senate. GOA will give you the particulars of the bill that passed the House, and we will provide you suggested language for a pre-written letter to your two senators.

Stay tuned. There is more to come.

Link for citation broken

Here is a more general link

They just don’t get it, as usual…

June 14, 2009

“Some say Holocaust Memorial shooting signals a broader war.”

That’s the headline, and a more disingenuous article I may never have read before. It’s all about racism… It’s all about feeling displaced as power brokers, and it’s all about hating Israel and the Jewish people, further it’s all about taking guns away from people. That’s a summery of what the article says.

Of course logic tells us that simply cannot be true. There may be a combination of those factors that tend to set off a few unstable individuals. However, just like the DHS study that is noted in the story, and was reported on here, it lumps all sorts of people into the same profile.

Let’s go after the main points:

Racism; The article says that many whites are upset with things like affirmative action. Well, that’s racism, and or sexism period. Figure it out…

Illegal Immigration: This ties in with racism, and the so called fear of rising minority populations according to the article. Sorry folks, but it’s about obeying the rule of law and has nothing to do with race whatsoever.

Minority  Crime: Again, this ties in with the above issues. People, especially Blacks and Latinos, and a growing situation with Asians, suffer at the hands of criminals from minority groups at an alarming rate. So this is a “white” issue! Again, it’s not about race, it’s about crime and the rule of law, and that doesn’t matter one iota what color you skin is, or where your ancestors came from.

White Supremacy Groups, a.k.a  Nazi’s: If these groups are in fact growing it would be news to most conservative and libertarian types. As a group, we simply have no known dealings with people like that. The article lumps a lot of people of differing backgrounds with different morals and values together, and that in itself, is immoral. I suppose that Pam at Atlas Shrugged will be surprised that she hates Israel…

Multiculturalism: This failed ethical theory has been being shoved down peoples throats for quite some time now. It’s fine and dandy to be proud of ones heritage. Having said that, it’s not fine to shove that down other peoples throats. There is no room in America for hyphens, you are an American period. You may see yourself as I do as an American of Irish decent, and that’s fine. But to call yourself an “Irish American” disavows all that is America. For those that were not so lucky to be from Irish stock? Well, just insert the name of your own heritage in place of Irish. Further, Multiculturalism requires that none judge another person or peoples  background or morals. That folk’s is just plain wrong. I need not give any support to groups that still practice slavery, such as Islam for example. Nor, again using Islam as an example, need I support killing other people because they refuse to submit to my religion or political persuasion. Further, this failed theory finds that reparations for the actions of people that died centuries ago are appropriate. Nope, try applying a real ethical methodology to that, and it comes up pretty short. Let’s address it that way here.  Can this be understood by the common man? Answer; no, the common person cannot understand or agree with being held responsible for something that he had no part in doing. Therefore, this could never become universal law, and so fails the test of ethical reasoning.

Gun Control (Really weapon control.): The article treats this as an also ran, that people are worried about because of the current administrations position. Those people are, once again, concerned about law, as in the Constitution and more importantly, the Bill of Rights. The authors seem to be fearful that all gun owners are lunatics and are ready to overthrow the government. Which brings us too…

If the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are of such inconsequential value, then why even continue to have a United States of America? Answer, because all the people that the article points to as threats, other than the noted racist’s and insane types, are in fact Americans that love the United States of America, with all it’s warts, and believe that this kind of nation offers the best hope for freedom and liberty for all people now, and forever.

God Bless America, and those that love her!

When pocket knives are outlawed…

June 13, 2009

In the seemingly never ending quest for control over you and yours we are now dealing with yet another attack on your natural unalienable right to defend yourself as well as your loved ones. The Second Amendment is most often thought to be only about guns. It’s not though…

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Incrementalism, the strategy also known as the death of a thousand cuts, is but one of the many tools used by the totalitarians to bleed your rights dry. One tiny cut at a time. You can’t say this, but you will be allowed to say that in exchange. Or, you can’t have that firearm, but we will allow you to have this one in exchange for not being allowed to have that one. You can’t have this knife, but we will allow you to have that one … And so it goes on, forever.

(CNSNews.com) – Second Amendment supporters are warning Americans about what they call an “unwarranted knife grab by Customs agents.”

On May 21, the Customs and Border Protection Agency proposed revoking earlier rulings that said “assisted-opening knives” – including pocket knives – are not switchblades.

The proposed new rule would expand the definition of “switchblade” to include knives that are opened with one hand as well as old-fashioned slip-joint knives, even the type of folding knives that Boy Scouts typically carry.

Under the proposed rule, most knives would be prohibited from entering the United States, critics warn.

The Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) are joining forces with a group called Knife Rights to support Americans’ right to own and carry the knives of their choice.”

“The Second Amendment doesn’t say ‘Firearms,’ it says ‘Arms,’ and knives are clearly covered,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb.

CCRKBA says one-hand-opening and assisted-opening knives represent the majority of most knife-makers’ product lines. “These are the knives Americans take with them to work and to play everyday,” CCRKBA said in a news release.

The group says Customs’ new interpretation of the Federal Switchblade Act will affect virtually everyone who carries a pocket knife, no matter what type.

“CBP came up with this absurd proposal and then tried slipping it into their regular notices, apparently hoping nobody would become aware of until too late. They provided for only the minimum 30-day comment period, and there’s no email comments allowed,” CCRKBA said.

The CBP’s “Proposed Revocation Of Ruling Letters And Revocation Of Treatment Relating To The Admissibilty (sic) Of Certain Knives With Spring-Assisted Opening Mechanisms” could make it illegal for the estimated 40 million law-abiding Americans who own and carry pocket knives to do so, CCRKBA said, not to mention the jobs lost.

The definition of a switchblade is found in the 1958 Federal Switchblade Act and has been reaffirmed by many years of legal decisions, CCRKBA said. “The Act is very clear that a switchblade must have an activating button on the handle. Without a button, it is not a switchblade and this has been upheld by numerous cases on many levels over the years.”

Second Amendment supporters accuse Customs of using “convoluted reasoning” to reach back beyond the 1958 law to expand their regulatory purview.

Knife Rights is leading a grassroots effort to stop Customs’ “pocket knife grab.” The group has posted model letters on its Web site for concerned citizens to send to Congress.

SOURCE

American TEA Party Revolution Flags

June 13, 2009

No, the Tea Party’s have not gone away, far from it. If you believe that we have been taxed enough already then please support this effort by a couple of Oath Keepers. Regular readers know that it’s seldom that I post anything that involves you, my readers, spending money. After all, one of my biggest complaints is that for several years I have never once received anything from the NRA that isn’t also a begging for bucks plea. Sure, support the NRA if you choose to do that. I’d much rather that you sent money to Gun Owners of America, but that’s just me.

This project, the Tea Party Flags, isn’t being put up by a multi-million dollar group, but by a couple of home grown Patriots. Please support them.

SOURCE

American TEA Party Revolution Flags

Send $17.00 cash or money order to:

TEA PARTY FLAGS
P.O. Box 492
Chewelah, WA 99109

$17 covers ALL costs, including shipping…

We have to wait for checks to clear, we don’t have a lot of money to put into this and have used what we have to get it set up. Cash or a money order will expedite shipping. A money order will offer you the protection you need too. I understand having worries about sending cash.

We don’t have a PayPal account set up for this, PayPal takes out a nice slice of the money before you get yours and we are trying to hold costs to a minimum and pass along a very high quality product to our friends and fellow TEA Party patriots at as low a price as possible.

It takes about 10 days to get the flags from the manufacturer, then a couple of days via Priority Mail to get them in your hands, so, we can have them well before the 4th of July!

These flags are simply gorgeous, they measure 24″ x 38″ and have lanyard rings. They are very well constructed and I was totally impressed when I saw the finished product.

My partner in this venture is ordering quite a few flags as I post this message. We are pretty certain that folks will want one, and I assure you, the REAL flag looks infinitely better than the picture does. Our digital camera sux.

We will need your name and mailing address, and a telephone number if you are comfortable with that, included with your order. We have to know where to send the flag. :P

We will NOT sell your information, WE HATE SPAMMERS TOO! Your information will remain completely confidential.

Photobucket

Photobucket

// AddThis

The Second Amendment and the States…

June 12, 2009

I was roundly blasted on several websites last year when the D.C. vs. Heller decision was rendered by the gutless cowards that make up the Supreme Court. All too many neophytes called it the greatest thing since smokeless powder for American gun owners. Guess what folks? The devil, as I always say, is in the details.

Thankfully, nearly all state Constitutions use wording that makes the U.S. Constitution look wimpy by comparison with regards to the populace owning and possessing weapons. The ability to defend oneself and others is an unalienable right, not an inalienable privilege handed to the serfs.

Hence now the Heller decision is being used to actually attempt to deny liberty and freedom to the masses by the forces that seek domination over them in complete denial of natural law. Read on… Oh, and don’t forget to read between the lines this time!

Last year’s landmark Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller definitively settled the fact that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right—as opposed to a collective one—to keep and bear arms. Yet that ruling applied only to the federal government (which oversees Washington, D.C.). Does the Second Amendment apply against state and local governments as well?

Although Heller never answered that question, Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion did provide a very potent hint. In footnote 23, Scalia observed that while the Court’s earlier ruling in U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876) stated that the Second Amendment did not apply against the states, “Cruikshank also said that the First Amendment did not apply against the States and did not engage in the sort of Fourteenth Amendment inquiry required by our later cases.”

To appreciate Scalia’s meaning, consider that the Supreme Court has been protecting First Amendment rights from state and local abuse since 1925’s Gitlow v. New York. The Court has done so under the so-called incorporation doctrine, whereby most of the Bill of Rights and certain other fundamental rights have been incorporated against the states via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which reads, “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Cruikshank is therefore a dead letter when it comes to free speech. So why should it still matter for gun rights? As the footnote basically points out, Cruikshank was decided before incorporation had even been invented. So it’s the modern incorporation doctrine that matters now, not the long-dead reasoning behind Cruikshank.

This controversy lies at the center of last week’s unfortunate decision in National Rifle Association v. Chicago (formerly McDonald v. Chicago), where the federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Second Amendment offers zero protection against the draconian gun control laws currently in place in Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois.

It’s a mistaken and also strangely misguided decision, as plaintiff’s attorney Alan Gura (who previously argued and won Heller) demonstrates in the appeal he quickly filed with the Supreme Court. As Gura notes, not only did the 7th Circuit decline “to perform the required incorporation analysis,” the court “erred in failing to heed Heller‘s cautionary statement that the pre-incorporation relics [including Cruikshank] lack ‘the sort of Fourteenth Amendment inquiry required by our later cases.'”

Moreover, the 7th Circuit even suggested that federalism would best be served by letting the states disregard the Second Amendment entirely. “Federalism is an older and more deeply rooted tradition than is a right to carry any particular kind of weapon,” Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote for the three-judge panel.

Yet as Gura rightfully responds in his petition, “To claim that of all rights, the Second Amendment must yield to local majoritarian impulses is especially wrong considering that the rampant violation of the right to keep and bear arms was understood to be among the chief evils vitiated by adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Indeed, the 14th Amendment was specifically written and ratified by the Radical Republicans after the Civil War to protect the recently freed slaves and their white allies from the depredations of the former Confederate states, including the infamous Black Codes, which curtailed property rights, liberty of contract, free speech, and the right to keep and bear arms.

The Second Amendment deserves the exact same respect as the rest of the Bill of Rights, nearly all of which have now been incorporated, something Gura is careful to explain. Which is precisely what the 7th Circuit should have said. Moreover, Gura persuasively argues that now is the right time for the Supreme Court to correct one of its most glaring historical errors by overturning the controversial Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), which essentially gutted the 14th Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause, which reads, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” As numerous legal historians have now documented, the text, original meaning, and history of that clause all point in one direction: It was designed to nationalize the Bill of Rights and other substantive rights.

The 7th Circuit essentially breezed past this argument, though it’s perhaps worth noting that Judge Easterbrook did so while repeatedly referring to the “Privileges and Immunities Clause,” which is actually located in Article IV of the Constitution, when he quite clearly meant to write (and refer to) the 14th Amendment’s “Privileges or Immunities Clause.” It’s a small error, to be sure, though it’s still one that the federal circuit ought not to make.

So what does all this mean for the future of the Second Amendment and gun rights? Last January, the 2nd Circuit, including Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor, reached the same erroneous conclusion about incorporation as the Seventh did last week. Yet in April, the 9th Circuit got it right, holding in Nordyke v. King that, “the right to keep and bear arms is ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’… [and] is necessary to the Anglo-American conception of ordered liberty.” This split among the circuits means the Supreme Court will almost certainly take up the issue.

Given that Gura’s provocative and sharply reasoned appeal is now in the Court’s hands, and given that Chicago’s contested handgun ban so closely resembles the D.C. ban nullified last year in Heller, this case offers the perfect opportunity for the Court to fully restore the Second Amendment to its rightful place in our constitutional system.

Damon W. Root is an associate editor at Reason.

Bonus video: Reason.tv talked with Alan Gura last June about “The High Stakes of the DC Gun Ban Case” just before the Supreme Court released its decision in the Heller case. Click below to watch and go here for downloadable versions and related materials.

SOURCE