The War on Guns: Backpedaling on the New 'Assault Weapons' Ban

The War on Guns: Backpedaling on the New 'Assault Weapons' Ban

Apparently Holder let the cat out of the bag early, and Pelosi is not ready yet to have that revealed.

Government has a Free Speech Right?

Over at the New Republic (Yes, I occasionally read TNR. Surprised?) Alan Wolfe
has an article excoriating the Supreme Court for really bad reasoning in a case involving one of our Natural Rights, free speech.

First off, I would put the 10 Commandments up against anything that another religion could come up with in terms of stating what our duties are to God and to one another. For those who are afraid the Lord would not be amused, I think he had plenty of time to work them out, and he might well say "bring on your seven aphorisms." Just sayin'.... But, to the point, neither corporations, nor governments can have rights. Individuals people have rights.

Yet more signs that things are unravelling.

The War on Guns: And So it Begins...

The War on Guns: And So it Begins...

Ratcheting Up...

The Newbius Papers alerts us to Attorney General Eric Holder's stated goal of re-imposing a so called "assault weapon ban" in the name of controlling violence on the Mexican border. Hat tip to the War on Guns. I titled my post "ratcheting up" because the the gun grabbers have already fired the first salvo in North Carolina by putting up their Ammunition Accountability nonsense. You can find that here.



Also from the War on Guns is a Gun Rights Examiner article
We don't do what we're told. The article discusses more ways to throw sand in the machine that thinks it is rolling over you.

No We Won't

Laura Hollis has a wonderful article up today. You can read it all here, and I encourage each one to read it, think about it, and ask ourselves how we can say to those who would be our masters, "No We Won't."

This may seem a complete non sequitur to people frantic about the disappearance of a trillion dollars down a rabbit hole. But that money isn’t spent yet. The 2010 elections could change things dramatically. But throwing the hypocritical spendthrift bums out of Congress (and they wrote this bill, not Obama) is dependent upon American’s access to truthful information. This, for the moment therefore, is the most critical fight.

Rick Santelli's now infamous "rant" on CNBC proves my point. It was the first sign of hope I’ve seen in months. And I am not alone (if the 1.7 million hits to CNBC’s website are any indication). Santelli tapped into a huge and powerful vein of public sentiment Mary Kate Cary in U.S. News and World Report called Santelli’s opinion, “the elephant in the room.” (Now there’s an image message-seeking Republicans should be able to relate to.)

Desperate times call for desperate measures. We can not just sit back and let our country be taken over by these people. We have a duty to our progeny to preserve Freedom and Liberty as birthrights for future generations of Americans.

The unFairness Doctrine

Rush Limbaugh weighs in (and protects his own pocketbook of course) on proposed rules designed to shut up those who won't shut up, in a rare appearance in the Wall Street Journal.

Mr. President, we both know that this new effort at regulating speech is
not about diversity but conformity. It should be rejected. You've said you're
against reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, but you've not made it clear where
you stand on possible regulatory efforts to impose so-called local content,
diversity-of-ownership, and public-interest rules that your FCC could
issue.

Go read the whole thing

Three Years Old

Finally, for today, my Grand Daughter was officially 3 years old yesterday. We are having a party for her on Saturday, but spent a little time last night with her and her parents. Children are a great blessing, and I learn something from her each time I am with her. Hopefully, she learns some (good) things from me as well.

Ammunition Import Ban?

I was just talking about our common interest in seeing to it that the Bill of Rights is strongly defended, when this popped up.

It looks like those who said the Obama Administration would strike while the iron is hot may have been correct, and the Administration may be doing it in a way that does not require them to even get a vote in Congress. In this morning's edition of the Shooting Wire, Jim Shepherd writes that Canadian officials have it on "good authority" our State Department may be on the verge of cutting off all imports of certain calibers of ammunition.

David Codrea, of the War on Guns says he hasn't checked it out, so consider it a rumor.

H/T to War on Guns.

Common Interests

Emmett Tyrell has a good column out today, that you can read on Townhall.com. Go ahead and read it first.

Tyrell's topic is the free speech clause in the First Amendment, arguably the most important of our Civil Rights. Whether a person is a Conservative, or a Communist, the ability to speak one's mind without fear of Government reprisals is fundamental. The First Amendment protects everyone.

Similarly, the Second Amendment has served to protect all of us from armed revolution. Since no one group has been able to secure for itself a majority of the arms in this nation, all have been forced to get what they want through the political system. (Some may argue that the Civil War was an armed rebellion. In fact, the Civil War represented traditional State on State warfare. The Confederacy had no plans to take over the United States, but rather formed a separate nation with the intent of going their own way. While it is true the Confederacy fired the first shot, that act was provoked by the United States blockading the Charleston harbor. What would Russia do if the US suddenly blockaded St. Petersburg?)

This nation has been blessedly free of the sort of bloody reprisals and retributions that have plagued other countries, not because we are made of better stuff, but because our Bill of Rights has generally been honored on both sides. But now we see more and more that one side, in this case the Left, is trying to silence us through the unFairness Doctrine, hate crime laws, speech codes, and to disarm us through outrageous laws that infringe on our Civil Rights. It seems right now that the Statesmen have been driven from office, leaving a greedy bunch of thugs in their place. Dark and dangerous times ahead. If you believe in God, pray for our country. I know I will be.

Life, Liberty...Not so Much

Cal Thomas has an excellent piece over at Townhall.com explaining the effect of the health provisions contained in the new Porkulus bill. He makes a similar point to the one I did several days ago, namely that once a society assumes the right to arbitrarily murder unborn infants, no one remains safe. The next likely candidate will be the elderly and the infirm. Who knows, maybe eventually we will get Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger's dream of eugenics. Only, of course, the ones to decide will be unelected bureaucrats in Washington.

You can see what is wrong with all this, I hope. What is wrong is that God decides who lives and whose work on earth is done. When man interferes to cut short a life that otherwise might serve God's plans, he takes on an awesome responsibility. Traditionally, we have called taking such responsibility murder.

Update: Laura Hollis also pointed out that all of this "steal from us"bill is designed specifically to impose a Marxist takeover of the United States. Hollis can be read here.

In the FUSA (Former United States of America)

Breda has a post about Friday the 13th of February. Go read it here. A quote from the piece is in order:

And to everyone who voted to enslave the freest people on earth...

I curse you. 48% of of your countrymen curse you. Future generations will curse you. Your own descendants will curse you.

Leave it to an Irish woman to know how to place a curse on someone.

H.R 45

I just fired off this correspondence to Mr. David E. Price, Democrat Congressman from the 4th District of North Carolina. You will note that I didn't mention that the Supreme Court has already struck down charging fees for the exercise of a Constitutionally protected right (think poll taxes here,) or that such laws have in the past been used to confiscate all legally owned weapons (think Nazi Germany, New York City, England and Australia, ) or that even if he can cite some benign purpose, for what purpose will some future administration use this legislation?

Mr. Price:

I am opposed to all public policy elements of H.R. 45.
I
am opposed to:

...passing a written examination to purchase a firearm.

...releasing medical records -- including confidential mental health
records -- to the Attorney General.

...submitting to a two day waiting
period to exercise my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

...paying a fee of $25 or more to exercise my Constitutional right to
purchase a firearm.

...creating a national database with all firearms
and firearms owners registered by serial number with the Federal Government.

...a Federal ban on all private firearms sales.

...all increases
in penalties for clerical errors related to this national firearms registry.

Please take these thoughts into account if HR 45 should come before you
for a vote, or if these provisions come up under some other legislation. From
the nature of the legislation, it looks as if the goal is to trip up anyone who
makes a purchase, or currently owns a gun, and decrease ownership generally by
scaring the timid into believing they can not own a weapon without tripping
themselves up. If that is indeed the purpose, it is hardly worthy of the Federal
Government. If not, then what is the purpose? Whatever it may be, the law
abiding people of NC are not the problem, and playing a "gotcha" game with us is
not going to help.

Regards,

I requested a response. I have never gotten one before from this Congressman, but if I get one, I will post it. Mr. Price has an F rating from the NRA. For the NRA to give out an F rating, a politician has to be absolutely terrible on gun issues, as they can find redeeming qualities even in Carolyn McCarthy. But he should realize that guns protect both liberals and conservatives, lefties and righties, and everyone in between.

In case anyone believes that all this fuss is over nothing, please read
How Democracies Become Tyrranies in the American Thinker. Anyone who thinks what Obama and the "Democrats" in Congress are doing is new can read what Plato wrote 2500 years ago.

5 Dangerous Things

I got this from the Newbie Shooter, down in Charlotte. It's "5 Dangerous Things You Should Let Your Kids Do". Of course, one of the unspoken points is you should be around to supervise at all times while they are playing at these things. I especially liked the pocket knife. When I was 7 years old, my Dad gave me a pocket knife for my birthday. I have carried it, or subsequent versions, literally everywhere I go, every day since. I learned to keep it sharp, how to carve wood, and make useful stuff with it. I could not describe how useful it has been, or how lost I would be without it. Sadly, today men no longer carry pocket knives, having not gotten in the habit due to school prohibitions. The slow demise of the pocket knife, the sidearm, and other things represent to me the massive feminization (read emasculation) of our society.

And with the passage of the Porkulus, we can now see that everything must be safe, so that we all live to the age when our masters decide they don't want to take care of us any more.

Update: The grand daughter and I went out and had a good time burning some brush clippings Saturday. Winds were light, and I got to show her the necessity of standing by and controlling the fire until it is completely burned out. Grandma was happy to get rid of that pile of brush clippings as well.

The Porkulus Bill

I discovered this tid bit, at Bloomberg.com, while reading about the proposed "Stimulus" that doesn't stimulate.

I have known for many years now that socialized medicine, as practiced in the UK and Canada does not work as advertized. The elderly especially are treated cruelly in these systems, because it is not deemed economically practical to treat them, despite treatments being available. How does this stack up with the Biblical command to honor your Mother and Father?

In my own case, my Dad is 80 years old, and just recently had a bout of cancer of the prostate gland. Of the two types of prostate cancer, this was the aggressive variety, and it surely would have killed him in 6 months. However, it was successfully treated through a combination of radiation and homone treatments. Would he have been treated under this proposed system? My Dad continues to operated a business at 80, and to be a productive member of society.

So, first the government has the blood of unborn children on its hands through Roe v. Wade and subsequent decisions. Now it will murder the elderly as well. When did they decide that they own our lives, and that it is theirs to do with as they please? When did we have that debate? The last I heard, we are citizens of this country, not slaves to a Fascist State. When are we going to act like it? Not to put too fine a point on this, how is this different than a farmer, whose prize bull no longer performs as a stud, so is euthanized? The farmer can do that because he owns the bull. In the same way, by witholding treatments that are available, if expensive, is the State not doing the same thing to senior citizens?