Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

Reddit/firearms.

I suspect this is the way it’s going to be for bump stock owners.  No one will come hunting for bump stocks, but if somebody commits a crime, the possession of a bump stock will add to the charges.

Well, I guess the DOJ is proud tonight.

This podcast involves Nick Gillespie (of Reason, a libertarian publication) discussing the coming gun control.  He is the second male to speak in the audio.

It’s a sign of the times that the woman has a more manly, robust, defensible view of rights than the men, who sound like quisling, hand-wringing, scared little boys.

There are a few things I would point out after listening to this.  First, Nick gives rather curt treatment to the notion that gun control is coming.  Eventually it will whether this time or soon.

Second, Nick waxes on and on about how resistance to gun buybacks and confiscations creates problems and makes “conservatives” look bad.  Those who are the very ones, he says, who supposedly support the “rule of law,” will be the ones opposing the rule of law.

This is what happens to unprincipled libertarians who found their rights in virtually nothing at all except that’s the way they want it to be.  It’s better for you to know and understand where yours comes from.  You have the RKBA because the Almighty says so, and any other foundation will wash away and disappoint you.  Philosophers call it a “deontological basis” for defining right and wrong.

If you refuse to found your rights on solid ground, you will become like Nick, just maybe a little more stubborn and unwilling to admit that you don’t have a case to the RKBA when the ruling elite say you don’t.

Free Beacon.

Liberal billionaire George Soros’s advocacy organizations are lobbying lawmakers on Capitol Hill to repeal an act protecting firearms manufacturers from liability for gun crimes including murder, disclosure forms show.

The Open Society Policy Center is Soros’s D.C.-based 501(c)4 nonprofit that works on domestic and international advocacy and is affiliated with the much larger Open Society Foundations. The center has poured nearly $9 million into lobbying a range of issues so far this year.

Soros’s group reported spending $2.6 million on lobbying throughout the first quarter, covering international, military, and appropriations issues. In addition, the center moved into gun control advocacy and reported lobbying on “issues related to a bill to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.”

As if we didn’t know his position before.  So the Jew who helped the Nazis find Hungarian Jews wants the people to be disarmed.  Color me shocked.

By the way, it’s easy to find the “fact-finders” who claim that George Soros never said what he said about helping the Nazis.  They are all liars, or just stupid and stolid.

Watch this video if you need proof.  It was difficult to get it to YouTube without Google scrubbing it.  Google helped Soros scrub other videos of his 60 Minutes interview, but redditors found tape (and I do mean tape, in a library, that they had to check out and convert to YouTube format), to reload it to YouTube.  Because YouTube = Google = wicked.

So don’t give me any of that crap about Soros never said this-and-that.  Yes … he … did.

Or if you need any other evidence, read this transcript.

KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.

Mr. SOROS: Yes. Yes.

KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.

Mr. SOROS: Yes. That’s right. Yes.

KROFT: I mean, that’s–that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?

Mr. SOROS: Not–not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t–you don’t see the connection. But it was–it created no–no problem at all.

KROFT: No feeling of guilt?

Mr. SOROS: No.

KROFT: For example that, ‘I’m Jewish and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be there. I should be there.’ None of that?

Mr. SOROS: Well, of course I c–I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was–well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in markets–that if I weren’t there–of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would–would–would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the–whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the–I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.  (George Soros, 60 Minutes interview transcript, December 20, 1998)

So enough said.  He is your enemy in every conceivable way.

Reddit/firearms.

Using Google, Bing, Murderpedia, Wikipedia’s Massacres, terrorism, and familicide pages I was able to find 89 mass shootings, 31 mass murders, and 14 school shootings since their 1995 Decree 64 laws classified Semi-Auto rifles with detachable magazines higher in caliber than .22 as Weapons of War and made them prohibited for civilian use. Argentina already had strict licensing & registration since 1973. And also made handguns above the caliber of .38 illegal for civilian use in 1993 (Decree 269). All these mass shootings should have 4 or more victims in one setting, session, incident or incidents without the FBI’s “cooling off period” in between. And you should all be able to find multiple sources if you Google or Bing them. Most of the sources are in Spanish so you may need Google or Bing translate. Hopefully this can aid in correcting the misinformation that mass shootings and school shootings are a uniquely American problem amongst developed nations. And showing that that applying Western European gun laws in Non-Western European countries are ineffective.

​http://www.filedropper.com/argentinamassshootings-copy

This is too good not to pass along.  Visit the reddit link to see his observations and conclusions from the data.

Now, it certainly isn’t the case that this will convince a controller not to be a controller.  Can a Leopard change it’s spots?  A controller is a controller because of a moral defect in his or her character.  But the thing we learn from all of this is what we already know, but need to rehearse again and again in order to have moral character.

Giving up your firearms never leads to more safety, for you or your family.  Never.  It only leads to the inability to defend home and hearth, a condition which the Almighty finds unacceptable.

News from New Zealand.

“We’ve got about 17,000 firearms in total – those numbers are good, but we want them to be way better, quite frankly. I’ve just got to get on and make sure that we work as hard as we can. There’s six months we’ve been given to carry out the exercise.”

[ … ]

In March, the Council of Licensed Firearms Owners said there could be as many as 400,000 weapons in New Zealand covered by the new legislation – that would leave about $500 per gun.

17 / 400 = 4.25%.

That’s low, but I would have actually expected it to have been lower than that.  I’m left wondering what that 4.25% is going to do for defense of home and hearth in the future?

And I wonder what the final percentage will be?  Do my New Zealand readers want to weigh in?  I know you’re out there.  I see you.

News from Chicagoland.

A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld a county-wide ban on assault weapons and limits on magazine capacity. The three-judge panel rendered a unanimous opinion for the court, including the assent of Trump appointee Judge Amy Joan St. Eve.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit found that two Cook County, Illinois residents who sought to challenge these restrictions came “forward with no reason — much less a compelling one,” to revisit the court’s own precedent establishing such rules as constitutional.

A U.S. District Court judge dismissed the lawsuit last year, and the three-judge panel upheld that ruling on Thursday.

[ … ]

“As the court recognized, states have broad authority to pass public safety laws to protect their citizens, including laws prohibiting assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines,” he said.

Thanks Amy.  What did you do – lie on the questionnaire, or did Trump fail to question you on your knowledge of the second amendment?  Who do we blame for this?

Is to identify their position on violation of the bill of rights, confiscation of property and especially gun rights.

Hugh Hewitt Retweeted Senate Judiciary

To which Jeff Bush remarked this.

Red Flag laws and Gun Violence Restraining Orders make a lot of sense.

Just like his brother, who supported a renewed AWB.

Max McGuire writing for The Federalist.

People often ask me why I am so unwilling to “compromise” on gun control. In reality, I’m not. A compromise is supposed to mean both sides of an argument get something out of the deal. Neither side gets everything they want, but they both at least get something.

When people ask me what I would be willing to compromise on, I give them a simple answer: I would trade tougher background checks in exchange for nationwide concealed-carry reciprocity. If we are going to create a system where every gun purchaser is fully vetted through the FBI’s background check system, then we should give those vetted and trusted gun owners the right to carry their guns nationwide.

And this is why compromise means that gun control always wins.

He’s willing to trade universal background checks for a system of federal licensing on guns, which national reciprocity is (where the FedGov decides who can carry and what the requirements must be in lieu of states’ rights).

So he gives up something in order to give up something else.  That’s why the controllers always win at the compromise game.  People willing to give up recognition of rights.