Ingraham: What is coronavirus doing to us as a people? ~ Fox News Video

Winning the war against COVID-19 must not kill the patient.

The Left is using the Coronavirus Pandemic Shutdown for their advantage, where ever they have a chance. They were able to close gun stores, and churches, and the right to congregate. You have to wonder, would the press be taking this so well, if they were being shut down for whatever excuse the government could come up with? I mean, really, couldn't their 24/7 hysteria cause panic? Or, will it just be the Conservative pro-Trump bloggers that they go after? The left wing mainstream media wouldn't have any problem with that, I'm sure!

But, with all that being said, Laura is a lot like me right now. When we get back to "normal," we certainly hope that it isn't a "new normal" like Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) has been talking about, with a "GREEN new normal," a "transformation of America." Wait, hold it right there. Shutting down the country to save us from the Covid-19 Pandemic isn't supposed to "kill the patient," that being our Constitutional rights.

And, maybe one of the biggest dangers to yet face us is.... Well, the election that is supposed to happen this year. While everyone seems pretty confident that President Trump will be re-elected, it would not surprise us to see a lot of Demonicrat shenanigans going on. Keep your eye on that, folks!

VIDEO: Why the major surge in guns and ammo sales?

Firearms and ammunition sales are obviously surging. In this video, we'll show you the Fox & Friends First story about...

Posted by Johnny2k's America on Saturday, December 12, 2015

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: Obama politicizes school shooting before the shooter is even known!

Obama politicizes the Oregon school shooting at UCC (a community college) before any information about the shooter is...
Posted by Johnny2k's America on Friday, October 2, 2015

RELATED VIDEO:

• August 30, 2015 ~ VIDEO: Politicizing a tragedy doesn't stop a tragedy

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: "Evil is not something in your hand. It's in your heart."

Do we need more gun restrictions? Will they stop the horrific mass shootings from happening? Well, look, if the killer...

Posted by Johnny2k's America on Friday, June 26, 2015

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Agents: Gun-smuggling suspect Hezbollah sympathizer ~ By Grant Rogers

Law enforcement officials at Midamar, 1105 60th Avenue SW, during a federal investigation in southwest Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on Tuesday, May 12, 2015.
(Photo: Jim Slosiarek/The Gazette)

On March 26 and May 8 authorities searched shipping containers connected to a company called Herz Enterprises, finding 152 guns and thousands of rounds of ammo hidden inside shipments of Bobcat skid loaders.

The hearing shed new light on the DHS investigation into the family, revealing that Ali Herz reportedly confessed after his arrest Tuesday to organizing two shipments of guns to Lebanon in 2014 and another in 2015.

Special agent Daniel Tigges testified that Herz said in an interview that he expected after the third shipment that the group would have netted $380,000 from the smuggling operation.

Tigges said Herz claimed he took half the profits and split the rest with his son, Adam, and brother, Bassem.

"He admitted that he knew it was wrong to ship guns out of the country," he said.

From the Time 2 Escape Editor

While this story covers the who (the four that were arrested), and the where (it happened right here in Cedar Rapids, Iowa), it doesn't cover the "why" or the "what," maybe for good reason. From this story, we only know that many guns and large quantities of ammo were being illegally shipped to Lebanon. We don't know if it was just for profit on the part of the Herz family and others. We also haven't been told here what the ultimate use of the weapons and ammunition could be, and who the ultimate buyers are. It's possible that the Federal agents are keeping that information from the press... or maybe, they don't know, but I really doubt that.

Even if the four that were arrested last week in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, were shipping the weapons and ammunition to Lebanon only because they love all the money they're going to make (they thought, until they got caught), is it still possible that they knew that the weapons would end up in the hands of Hezbollah terrorists? It is surprising to me, actually, that we haven't yet heard of any charges for aiding the enemy. Just sayin'...


RELATED STORIES

• May 18, 2015 ~ VIDEO: The purchase of guns is not the problem, it's what is done with them by the buyer

• May 13, 2015 ~ Brother of alleged gun smugglers denies pizza store's role in plot

• December 1, 2012 ~ U.S. Halal Company Raided, Founder Has Islamist Ties

*    *    *    *

Agents: Gun-smuggling suspect Hezbollah sympathizer

By Grant Rogers, The Des Moines Register

May 15, 2015, 10:39 p.m. EDT

From USATODAYcom

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa — The eldest of four Cedar Rapids family members accused of smuggling firearms into Lebanon is a Hezbollah sympathizer who met with reported members of the terrorist group during a trip abroad, federal agents testified Friday.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Murphy called six witnesses to paint Ali Afif Al Herz as loyal to the Lebanese-based Shiite militant and political organization. The United States has classified Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.

Murphy intended the testimony from agents with the Department of Homeland Security and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to persuade Chief Magistrate Judge Jon Scoles to keep Herz, 50, in county jail while awaiting trial on charges that he and three other family members tried to smuggle hundreds of guns and thousands of rounds of ammunition into Lebanon, hiding it in storage containers.

Clockwise from top left, Adam Ben Ali Al Herz, 22; Ali Afif Al Herz, 50; Sarah Majid Zeaiter, 24 ; and Bassem Afif Herz, 29.
(Photo: Special to the Register)

Defense lawyer Anne Laverty accused Murphy of using "distraction and fear tactics" with no supporting evidence that ties Herz to any terrorist group. Herz came to the United States in 1984 for college and gave up on religion after watching decades of strife in Lebanon and the Middle East, she said.

~~~ READ MORE at USATODAY.com ~~~

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: The purchase of guns is not the problem, it's what is done with them by the buyer

This report came a day or two after the arrest of four people for shipping guns illegally to Lebanon, and the raids on...

Posted by Johnny2k's America on Monday, May 18, 2015

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

What Happened to Chicago’s Murder Rate After Illinois Upheld Concealed Carry and Why it Matters ~ By Mike Miller

While statistics vary and people on both sides of the gun debate differ on whether concealed carry laws help to prevent gun crime, this thing is certain: If my loved ones or I were under attack, I would want the capability to stop the attackers. Dead in their tracks, if necessary. Wouldn’t you?

Right now, it looks like great news for advocates of the 2nd Amendment. However, a word of warning, it may be too early to celebrate. From Jason Howerton at TheBlaze:

The more telling statistics will be revealed as 2014 marches on. Still, as always, correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation.

Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy called the drop in crime a “trend.” He attributed the drop to the “talent level of individuals” on the police force, “intelligent policing strategies” and other programs. He did not mention the concealed carry law.

Nope, no credit for the new Illinois concealed carry law in that statement! Of course, McCarthy would want to take credit for the drop in crime! This should not be a surprise to anyone.

As you will also read in this column (see below), "...police said more than 1,300 illegal guns were recovered in the last three months." While the anti-gun liberals will also give that statistic credit for the drop in crime rates in Chicago, there is no way to know what it means without further information. But don't worry, the liberal mainstream media are still likely to mention it anyway.

And in the mean time, it doesn't sound like the military leaders believe that there should be concealed carry on military bases, even when that policy could prevent tragedies like the second Fort Hood shooting in less than five years.  Just keep in mind who their boss is: Yep, it's the Commander-in-Chief, Barack Obama.  We could see that one coming, right? Just sayin'...

What Happened to Chicago’s Murder Rate After Illinois Upheld Concealed Carry and Why it Matters

By Mike Miller

April 4, 2014

From Independent Journal Review

In July of 2013, Illinois became the last state in the union to enact a concealed carry law. In January of this year, the state began accepting applications for permits. This week, Chicago police announced that the city’s first quarter murder rate was the lowest since 1958.

Via ABC-affiliate Eye Witness News in the Windy City:

• The first three months of the year saw 6 fewer murders than the same time frame in 2013–a 9 percent drop–and 55 fewer murders than 2012, according to a statement from Chicago Police.

• There were 90 fewer shootings and 119 fewer shooting victims, drops of 26 and 29 percent respectively, according to police statistics.

• Compared to the first quarter of 2012, there have been 222 fewer shootings and 292 fewer shooting victims. Overall crime is down 25 percent from last year, and police said more than 1,300 illegal guns were recovered in the last three months.

Coincidence? Hard to say. And too early to tell. Although, I doubt that the anti-gun crowd is celebrating the good news.

~~~ READ MORE on Independent Journal Review ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Our inviolable right to self-defense ~ By Phil Elmore

Given these facts of existence, the only legitimate role of government in a free society is the protection of individuals' natural rights. That is why governments are instituted among human beings – or at least, that is why they should be.

When a government denies its citizens' rights or actively seeks to infringe on these rights, it subordinates the individual to the state and injures that individual in the name of the community. By what right is this done? By what right is this force initiated and this theft made? How dare New York's commie libs steal the right of self–defense through their burdensome taxes and their obvious schemes for future confiscation? They have no right to do this; there is no justification for it.

Self-defense is an individual right and, as such, is inviolable ... no matter what lies Democrats tell.

Phil explains the inviolable natural rights of individuals and how it relates to the right to self-defense. Phil's explanation of individual rights and self-defense makes what Bob Lonsberry wrote all the more scarier, as it means the State of New York may just make it even easier for your rights to be violated:

Registration is the foreplay of confiscation, and this piece of legislation would put the physical location of every legal gun in the state at the touch of the government’s finger. The government would know who had guns and where they kept them.

And so too, presumably, would anyone who filed a freedom of information request. New York has already held that its pistol permits – which include personal information as well as a list of handguns owned – are public records. This new list of guns and gun owners would also be a public record.

Which means the bad guys have just learned where every gun is. That tells them what houses are unprotected, that tells them what houses they should burglarize.

And with the list of where each gun is stored, it will make burglary all the easier.

Our inviolable right to self-defense

PHIL ELMORE

By Phil Elmore

March 10, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

The state in which I live, New York, is contemplating a law that would register and tax every firearm in the state. Already ruling the state most hostile to gun owners, New York's Democrats wish to enact a precursor to confiscation that is not just transparent in its intentions, but onerous in its financial burdens. What is often lost in debates over laws of this type is what they truly say to the citizens they affect. A law that restricts the technology of self-defense is a law that criminalizes self-defense itself. It is a law that violates your civil rights. It is a direct affront to you as a human being.

The Founding Fathers of the United States indicated their acceptance of, and based the United States Constitution on, the concept of natural rights. For the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't matter if you believe in God or not. Most deists and theists believe rights are God-granted, while others believe natural rights come from nature. Natural rights exist regardless.

Because you are a discrete biological entity, you are an individual. Every group of people can be broken into individuals. No group of people can exist as a single living organism because they simply aren't one, any more than a parking lot full of cars can be a single automobile.

Because no human can be another human, no one can live another's life. By virtue of your nature as an individual, you are born with the inalienable property right to yourself as a person. This means that no human being has a claim on your time or your effort without your consent. Think about it. If you do not own you, who does? If you are anything but your own property, you belong to someone else, which makes you that someone's slave. Are you a slave?

Your property right to your person extends to a general right to possess legally acquired property, for no human can exist without property of some kind. This is an axiom of existence. You cannot exist in space unconnected to all other existents, the sole resident of an empty bubble of space-time. This does not mean you have an automatic claim to someone else's property by virtue of your need for it, however. This means that you necessarily have the right to possess property if you can indeed acquire it. Claims to the contrary made by Marxists, collectivists and Michael Moore are empty. If you have no right to possess property once you have obtained it, those making this assertion must be making it naked while floating in empty rooms from which even air has been evacuated.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

The new abortion, Part 3 ~ By Chuck Norris

Chuck Norris discusses the battle that is being lined up right now that will decide whether we are able to keep our guns. At this time, the new Supreme Court nominee is Elena Kagan, and as you will read below, she is the big unknown as to her feelings about the 2nd Amendment. It could possibly and ultimately come down to her, and not George Soros or the anti-gun lobbies or even the U.N..

Thomas Jefferson wrote near the end of his life in 1823: "On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."

The clear interpretation of the Second Amendment provided the basis for Jefferson to offer this encouragement to his nephew Peter Carr, "Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks."

That same clear interpretation also forever establishes "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, [and it] shall not be infringed." As George Washington stated, "Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth."

The 27 words of the Second Amendment: "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." (emphasis mine)

By Chuck Norris

Posted: May 10, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

(Editor's note: This is Part Three of a three-part series on the threat to the Second Amendment and Americans' firearm freedoms.)

I believe the political stars are aligning right now for the opening of a new front in the battle against our gun rights: via the election and work of an anti-gun president, the disarmament passions of the Washington elite and the United Nations, the appointments of gun prohibitionists from the White House to the Supreme Court and the funding of an anti-Second Amendment movement by billionaire progressives like George Soros.

In Part One, I discussed President Obama's anti-Second Amendment record and his administration's goals to use dormant treaties and global agencies to loosen the boundaries and binds of the Second Amendment. In Part Two, last week, I further discussed the United Nation's participation in that treaty development and "consensus" process.

If it weren't bad enough to have a plethora of government officials in Washington that abandon and abolish the principles of the Second Amendment, it is far worse to have them in the highest court in the land, the U.S. Supreme Court, dutifully designated with the honor to interpret and apply our Constitution to cases across the land, and with lifetime tenure to boot.

To add insult to injury to the degradation of the Second Amendment, months back Obama appointed new Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor with her narrow view of the Second Amendment. Then a few weeks ago, U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens said he will retire in June, leaving President Obama with an open field of liberal appointees.

Gun-rights advocate and scholar David Kopel offers a summary overview of how Obama's potential replacements for retiring Justice Stevens measure up to the Second Amendment:

Strongly ideological, highly committed gun prohibitionist: Harold Koh.

Extensive record of anti-Second Amendment leadership: Secretary of State Clinton, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Gov. Deval Patrick.

Limited but clearly negative record on right to arms: Judge Diane Wood, Judge Merrick Garland.

Mixed record, but with very little positive: Amy Klobuchar.

Mixed record: Cass Sunstein, Janet Napolitano [negatives include the ridiculous Department of Homeland Security report conflating political dissent with terrorism; as governor she signed some pro-right to arms legislation, and vetoed other bills], Jennifer Granholm [like Napolitano, a mixed record as governor, including signing some important reforms].

Unknown: Elena Kagan (MY NOTE: It was just announced Sunday, May 9, 2010, that Elena Kagan - hmmm... rhymes with pagan - will be the nominee for the Supreme Court.)

It's that "unknown" Elena Kagan who has gun owners particularly concerned at the moment, not only because she's Obama's favored choice but because evidence for her beliefs on gun control is extremely scarce. Then again, does anyone suppose Obama's desire to appoint her infers her conservative stance on the Second Amendment?

The gist is that none of Obama's proposed nominees has any firm respect for the Second Amendment, and this "missing link" may become pivotally important if the United Nations passes a gun ban treaty. Any such treaty will conflict directly with our Second Amendment constitutional freedoms, and it's entirely possible that the Supreme Court will have to resolve the issue.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

Proof: More guns = less crime ~ By Joseph Farah

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: January 16, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 There it was. Good news on New Year's Day on the front page of the Washington Post. "Homicide totals in 2009 plummet in District, Prince George's," the headline read. In a story that likely got lost amid the holiday revelry, the paper reported that the nation's capital in 2009 experienced its lowest number of homicides in 45 years. In case you can't do the math real quick, that previous year would be 1964. And for those too young to remember, 1964 was pretty much the end of an era. It was before the riots, before the Vietnam War was seriously escalated to become a national dividing point, before the drug explosion. So what happened in Washington, D.C., in 2009 that might account for such a dramatic decline in homicide deaths? Hmmmmm. Let me see. Nothing comes to mind. Oh, wait a minute! Wasn't 2009 the first full year following the overturning of Washington's gun ban by the Supreme Court in the Heller case? Could that have something to do with it? Apparently the Washington Post newsroom didn't think so. It was not even mentioned in the New Year's Day story – not even as an afterthought. That should tell you something about the political culture and worldview in elite newsrooms of America's major metropolitan newspapers. But think about it! Once again, we have more real-life evidence of the theory so well articulated by John R. Lott in his breakthrough book, "More Guns, Less Crime." READ FULL STORY >

U.N. poised for a gun grab ~ By Tom Tancredo

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Tom Tancredo Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 If you think the Obama administration doesn't need help in dreaming up new schemes to reinterpret the Constitution and add new restrictions on our freedom, think again. Arms-control bureaucrats at the United Nations and dozens of allied NGOs (that's non-governmental organizations in non-bureaucratic lingo) have been busy for two decades talking and negotiating among themselves to produce an international treaty regulating the sale of small arms. A U.N. resolution adopted in October calls upon member nations to negotiate the matter and finish writing a treaty by 2012. The United States voted for the resolution, which was adopted almost unanimously. President Bush, for all his mistakes and miscalculations, never allowed his U.N. representatives to participate in such negotiations. But Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reversed course and agreed to join the negotiations. Secretary of State Clinton announced in October that the U.S. would join the negotiations "if they are based on consensus," implying that the U.S. could exercise a veto if negotiations went off course. That implies that the U.S. would reject any treaty that violates our Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. The problem is she can't make that promise or guarantee that outcome. The truth is it is very dangerous for the U.S. to go down this road no matter how many assurances are given by Obama and his minions. Once committed to the "process of negotiations," it is hard to reject a product based on "international consensus." There are good reasons why the U.S. ought to stay out of such negotiations, and many good reasons to be wary of any international treaty on the subject. To put this whole matter in perspective, ask yourself how well existing arms-control agreements are working and how well international agencies are enforcing those agreements. READ FULL STORY >

My gun: A most necessary tool ~ By Phil Elmore

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Phil Elmore Posted: December 24, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Guns are technology. Many of us no longer think of firearms as technology, however. We've allowed popular culture, emotional mythos and political propaganda to affect our view of these tools. We see them not as labor-saving devices, but as statements. We may uphold them as emblematic of liberty or we may condemn them as inherently, murderously dangerous, depending on our political outlook. But we've stopped understanding them technologically. Greek mathematician and physicist Archimedes is reported to have said, "Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world." A gun is a lever. It is a hammer. It is a screwdriver. It is a pair of pliers. By this, I mean that a firearm is a force multiplier. It saves you labor by making it easier to deliver force to a target with less effort than using your fists alone. This is what all tools, including the lever, do. They amplify – they multiply – your effort so that you can do more than you could with your bare hands. It is in losing this recognition that guns are labor-saving technology that we commit mistakes at the socio-political level. Our popular culture has begun to vilify firearms and those who carry them. Law-abiding citizens who struggle to comply with complex and onerous laws, such as those found in left-leaning states like New York, are repeatedly cast as villains in our popular media. Worse, this propaganda has infected our courts, resulting in a "justice" system that punishes gun owners for daring to be anything other than passive victims. READ FULL STORY >

“Task Force” Using Crime And Corruption In Mexico As Premise For Gun Control In U.S.

From National Rifle Association of America (via Covertress)

Friday, October 16, 2009 On October 13, the Associated Press reported that the so-called Bi-National Task Force on Rethinking the United States-Mexico Border has produced a report, which, among other things, calls for re-imposition of the federal “assault weapon” ban of 1994-2004, saying it would improve security in both countries. The “border-rethinking” group has been put together by the Pacific Council on International Policy and the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations. The group consists mostly of former U.S. and Mexican officials and journalists, none of them currently elected by the people of the U.S. or Mexico to make policy on these issues. According to the Pacific Council, the report is being released under the auspices of the Mexican CFR on November 13th and is absolutely unavailable until that time. The Brady Campaign, naturally, has a copy of the report anyway, and quotes its executive summary as saying “The United States should intensify efforts to curtail the smuggling of firearms, ammunition, and bulk cash into Mexico by aggressively investigating gun sellers, regulating gun shows, [and] reinstituting the Clinton-era ban on assault weapons.” Congress finished its hearings on the Mexico situation several months ago, and many members of Congress have declared their line-in-the-sand opposition to re-imposition of the ban. So given that Brady Campaign seems to be the only outfit that has a copy of the embargoed report, it’s safe to conclude that the “task force” is trying to keep the public primed for the next attack on the ownership of firearms like the AR-15 and Remington 11-87, and ammunition magazines designed for defensive purposes. Whatever the opinions of those who sip tea and nibble biscuits while musing about how to restrict the rest of us, re-imposing the ban would have no effect on Mexico’s historic problem of crime and corruption, for at least three reasons. First, as has been amply demonstrated, the cartels are not limited to semi-automatic AR-15s and AK-47s. They have hand-held and tripod-mounted, belt-fed machine guns; grenade launchers and grenades; and a variety of other high-end firearms, explosives, and special-purpose optics and communication gear acquired from countries other than the United States. Thanks to some Americans’ insatiable appetite for mind-altering drugs, they have enough money to buy the “task force” 10 times over, along with any weapon that can be found among any infantry platoon on Earth, no matter what kind of gun law gets imposed. Second, most of the firearms seized from the cartels do not come from the United States. The claim that “90 percent” of Mexican "crime guns" originate in the U.S. is false. It does not relate to all firearms the Mexicans have seized from the cartels, but only to guns that the Mexicans have asked the BATFE to trace. As the Government Accountability Office has explained, “In 2008, of the almost 30,000 firearms that the Mexican Attorney General’s office said were seized, only around 7,200, or approximately a quarter, were submitted to [BATFE] for tracing.” The 6,700 guns that BATFE traced to the U.S. accounted for about 90 percent of the 7,200 guns that BATFE traced, but only 22 percent of all firearms seized by the Mexican government Third, the ban did not stop the production and sale of any guns, it merely put a one-attachment limit on new guns. For example, before the ban, AR-15s had a pistol-type grip, flash suppressor and bayonet mount. The 750,000 AR-15s made during the ban had only the grip. If the “task force” thinks the fate of Mexico hinges on whether a relatively small number of semi-automatic rifles have flash suppressors and bayonet mounts, its members ought to switch to decaffeinated tea and sugar-free cookies during their get-togethers. Make no mistake, however. Even if the “task force” doesn’t understand the finer details of the old “assault weapon” ban, leading gun ban advocates like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, the Brady Campaign, the Violence Policy Center, the Joyce Foundation, and the Legal Community Against Violence do. If they have their way, they will eventually drag us into a much larger battle over the right to keep and bear semi-automatic shotguns, M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, and Ruger Mini-14s, in addition to the AR-15s, semi-automatic AK-47s, and other commonly owned firearms that were at issue during the 1994-2004 ban.

Copyright © 2009, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes. 11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030 800-392-8683

'Anti-gunner' OSHA nominee advances without questions

From WorldNetDaily

'By fiat could outlaw firearms in workplaces, parking lots across America' Posted: November 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily The U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee today approved without question and without comment the nomination of David Michaels, the chief of a George Soros-funded Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy, as the next head of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. As WND reported, Second Amendment advocates sounded an alarm over Michaels, warning the most significant attack on gun rights in years soon could come in the form of workplace "safety" regulations. Obama's nomination of Michaels, a George Washington University professor, drew reaction from Walter Olson at Overlawyered.com. Olson said Michaels' strong views on firearms are "by no means irrelevant to the agenda of an agency like OSHA, because once you start viewing private gun ownership as a public health menace, it begins to seem logical to use the powers of government to urge or even require employers to forbid workers from possessing guns on company premises, up to and including parking lots, ostensibly for the protection of co-workers." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Bill forces citizens to list guns on taxes?

From WorldNetDaily

Firearms tracking act gives authorities access to your 'mental health records' Posted: October 12, 2009 ~ 10:30 pm Eastern By Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily A firearms tracking bill has many bloggers up in arms over a federal requirement that would purportedly force gun owners to list their firearms on federal income tax returns. But while the bill implements sweeping gun-control measures – including one that would prohibit citizens from owning a gun without a license – the income tax provision doesn't exist. The Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act, or H.R. 45, was introduced Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Il., on Jan. 6. While the bill does not include stipulations about reporting guns on tax forms, it does contain numerous gun-control proposals that are drawing fierce criticism from gun-rights advocates. If enacted, the bill would forbid any person from owning any handgun or semiautomatic firearm that accepts a detachable ammunition feeding device, not including antiques, without obtaining a license. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

God and guns, Part 1 ~ By Chuck Norris

From WorldNetDaily

By Chuck Norris Posted: October 12, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 God and guns are what our country was founded upon. Any new student of the Revolutionary period quickly learns that. They are what keep us strong, or what should keep us strong. They are there for our defense. God and guns were so important to our founders that they established our protection to exercise them in the first two amendments to our Constitution – the uninhibited and unrestricted freedom to choose our own religion and bear our own firearms. But, more and more, these pillars of American life and liberty are being attacked and abandoned, not only out of sheer bias but ignorance of our founders, the Revolutionary period and our Constitution. Instead, these pivotal American rights have become the brunt end of cultural jokes and are often regarded as biased lifestyle components of "rednecks" and rural citizens. For example, gone but not forgotten is even President Obama's partiality on the campaign trail in April 2008. You might recall, at a private California fundraiser, when he addressed the economic hardships of those in Pennsylvania, he quipped: "You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. … And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion … as a way to explain their frustrations." Presently, with the Supreme Court back in session, and new justice Sonia Sotomayor's narrow view of the Second Amendment, gun rights are back again on the docket. Two weeks ago, concerning a case out of Chicago, the justices agreed to rule on whether the Second Amendment gives Americans a constitutional right to keep and bear arms that is enforceable against local and state gun laws. And with two more justices likely on the edge of retirement, the more than 90 million firearm bearers in this country have a right to be concerned. No wonder some are calling the gun issue the new abortion. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Cass Sunstein: Regulating America to death ~ By Ellis Washington

From WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington Posted: September 12, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009

Animals should be allowed to sue their owners. ~ Cass Sunstein

Because people ascribe a degree of respectability to academics, intellectuals, philosophers and scholars, they can disregard the rights of the people much easier than a naked tyrant. In fact, Rousseau, Darwin and Nietzsche can go places Hitler, Stalin, Chavez and Obama could never dream. As I have written many times, the Obama administration are the masters of misdirection and chaos theory; therefore, while the America people last week were transfixed on the resignation of "Green [Jobs] Czar" Van Jones, another even more dangerous fascist from the academy quietly slipped through the portals of power. Last Thursday Cass Sunstein, a former colleague and mentor of Obama's at the University of Chicago Law School, was confirmed by a Senate vote of 57-40 as the new director of regulatory affairs and information, an obscure but powerful agency within the Office of Management and Budget. Here is what the "regulatory czar" does: He regulates laws – past, present and future. Sunstein is a friendly fascist who only "nudges" people to bow to his will. TV host Glenn Beck says of Cass Sunstein that he is "the most powerful invisible man you'll ever see." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Digg this story

A Few Words On Gun Control

From The Right Perspective Ranger Tom is a regular reader of I Luv SA, always adding thought provoking and insightful comments to posts. He also has his own blog, Ranger Tom’s Rants (although he sports a less politically correct name on the blog). Which is exactly one of the reasons why I appreciate his articles – Ranger Tom calls a spade a spade. He doesn’t pussy-foot around issues. Here is Ranger Tom with “A few words on Gun Control”: Almost everyone here in the US can tell you what was to be the first battle in our War of Independence. The Battle of Lexington Green in Massachusetts in April, 1775. Paul Revere, riding his horse throughout the night spreading the word that the “The British are coming, the British are coming!” But what’s now conveniently left out of the US History textbooks today is why the British were coming. And why was that? Here’s what they’re leaving out: General Thomas Gage, military governor of Massachusetts, under direct orders of King George, decided to counter these moves by sending a force out of Boston to confiscate weapons stored in the village of Concord. Confiscate the weapons… And why did the British want the weapons confiscated? Well, to be able to properly control one’s subjects, first you must be able to take away their ability to resist. It’s the main reason our founding Fathers put the Second Amendment into the Bill of Rights, or collectively, the First 10 Amendments to the Constitution. They, of all people knew that any Government could grow to distrust its people, and in time, subjugate them. The only way to really insure that this would never happen is to give the citizens the tools in which to defend themselves from tyranny. Take away the guns, you have slaves. [READ THE COMPLETE COLUMN]

Washington drops hammer on state gun plan

"As you may know, federal law … supersedes the act" Posted: July 21, 2009 9:14 pm Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily Federal gun regulators have written to gun dealers around Tennessee, dropping the hammer on a new state law that exempts weapons made, sold and used inside the state from interstate regulations. The letter, dated just days ago, was distributed to holders of Federal Firearms Licenses. In it, Carson W. Carroll, the assistant director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, told dealers the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, adopted this year, "purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition manufactured in the state, and which remain in the state, from most federal firearms laws and regulations." The exemption is not right, the federal agency letter contends. "As you may know, federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain with the same state," the letter said. "All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. "These, as well as other federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunition have crossed state lines," the letter said. [CONTINUE READING]

Pay More Attention to Harold Koh ~ By Oliver North

By Oliver North It is said that there are two kinds of lawyers -- those who know the law, and those who know the judge. And then there is Harold Koh, the man who is likely to be the next Legal Adviser to the State Department. Koh most recently served as Dean of the Yale Law School and before that as Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Labor and Human Rights in the Clinton administration. He is a prolific author and a legal activist of the Left. Earlier this week, his nomination to be Foggy Bottom’s barrister was voted out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 12-5. His pending appointment has received scant attention from the media or the senators who will decide his fate. It deserves a closer look. The State Department Legal Adviser is unique. The person holding the position helps formulate and implement U.S. foreign policy; advises the Justice Department on cases with international implications; influences U.S. positions on issues considered by international bodies; represents the U.S. at treaty negotiations and international conferences; has input into the drafting of Security Council resolutions and the interpretation of treaties. Koh’s record deserves more scrutiny because he is not just an attorney who knows the law -- he is an activist lawyer who knows what he wants the law to be. From all he has said and written, it is apparent that Koh wants U.S. jurisprudence to be shaped by international law, European courts, foreign governments, and international organizations like the United Nations. Koh puts himself in the “transnationalist” camp of legal practioners, which he describes as those who “believe in and promote the blending of international and domestic law.” He has written that “transnationalists believe that U.S. courts can and should use their interpretive powers to promote the development of a global legal system.” [Continue reading]

digg story ~ Submitted by Pepper1024