Daily news sites: Second Amendment| Find Breaking World News
Latest Updates
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Second Amendment. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Second Amendment. Tampilkan semua postingan

Clear thinking on mass killings and gun control is slowly emerging

Clear thinking on mass killings and gun control is slowly emerging


Efforts to prevent future mass killings, like the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting where 20 children and six adults died last year, continue on Capitol Hill. These efforts, however, are symbolic, not substantive, and focus too much on guns, magazines and related firearms issues, instead of on what causes people to commit these horrible crimes. The key element in these shootings is the mental condition of the killers and what things fostered their desire to kill people, and that must be addressed.

Whatever Congress comes up with will certainly put the liberties and privacy rights of Americans at risk, as limits on 2nd Amendment rights and invasions of private medical information will necessarily be under consideration.

We will not reduce mass shootings by limiting what law abiding gun owners can purchase, since they won't use them to hurt other people. Vice President Joe Biden's insulting implication that people don't really "need" an AR-15, and just want one because of how it feels ignores a basic tenet of the nation that elected him: we have personal liberties here, and that's all the reason we need to buy any gun.

Similarly, a blanket denial of 2nd Amendment rights to those with any record of treatment by or consultation with mental health professionals is excessive.

There has been strong support for the idea that guns, high-capacity magazines, etc. are responsible for mass shootings and should be restricted or banned, but that support is waning. More important is that this truly misses the point, and basing policies on missed points is a prescription for failure.

And now there is more compelling evidence that banning or restricting guns or magazines won't work, and even will make things worse, and it comes from a group that has instant credibility on this issue: police officers.

In March, PoliceOne, which serves police officers across the nation and has more than 450,000 registered members, "conducted the most comprehensive survey ever of American law enforcement officers’ opinions on the topic gripping the nation's attention in recent weeks: gun control," so states the introduction to PoliceOne's report.

"More than 15,000 verified law enforcement professionals [70 percent of whom are field-level law enforcers who are face-to-face in the fight against violent crime on a daily basis] took part in the survey, which aimed to bring together the thoughts and opinions of the only professional group devoted to limiting and defeating gun violence as part of their sworn responsibility," the introduction noted, in discussing the nearly-thirty question survey.

Here are some of the takeaway points from that survey:
** Ninety-five percent said that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.
** Seventy-one percent said that a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. And, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime.
** Roughly 85 percent said passing the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have zero or a negative effect on their safety.
** They cited things they felt would help prevent mass shootings: more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians, 28 percent; more aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons, 19 percent;
more armed guards/paid security personnel, 15 percent.
** Nearly 90 percent believe casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.
** More than 80 percent support arming school teachers and administrators who willingly volunteer to train with firearms and carry one on the job.
** More than half of respondents feel increased punishment for obviously illegal gun sales could reduce gun violence.
** The officers were about evenly split on whether citizens should be required to complete a safety training class before being allowed to buy a gun.
** They believe that cultural/societal influences promote gun violence: violent movies and video games, 14 percent; early release and short sentencing for violent offenders, 14 percent; poor identification/treatment of mentally-ill individuals, 10 percent. However, 38 percent cited a decline in parenting and family values.

The majority plainly does not support the ideas being pushed by gun-control advocates favoring restrictions on weapons and magazines, and many feel those controls will negatively affect their ability to fight violent crime. They also support enforcing existing laws before passing new ones.

The mainstream media openly supports restrictions on personal liberty, at least where guns are concerned, and suppresses news of gun owners stopping crimes. Many of our elected public servants, who prefer an unarmed and therefore compliant populace, also support gun control.

But the majority of police surveyed overwhelmingly favor an armed citizenry, would like to see more guns in the hands of responsible people, and are skeptical of any greater restrictions placed on gun purchase, ownership, or accessibility.

Police officers patrolling America’s streets have a legitimate interest in making sure that we make decisions about guns that support their work and do not make things worse. With this survey, their voice has been heard, and they disagree with the current mania.

Perhaps it would be smart to listen to them.

New York State Non-Compliance Resistance to the NY Safe Act Arms Bill

Link to video (full 33 minute version) from January 29, 2013 Q&A forum

From YouTube:

"Residents of Erie County, New York overflow the State's dictating / Q & A forum concerning the
unconstitutional NY Safe Act arms bill.

The passion and anger from the people is evident of Erie County resistance.

After the first speaker spoke, the second one was introduced. A request from an audience member to
recite the Pledge of Allegiance was ignored by theState. So the people took over and assertively
recited it anyway.

The State attempted to have private interviews with the media which alienated the crowd further, who
then demanded transparency. Then the State wanted the questions from the audience to be private, which riled folks even more.

Questions asked by Western New Yorkers covered: non-compliance, penalties, jury nullification, 2nd
Amendment profiling into domestic terrorists, government tyranny, police, sheriff, and more.

Other topics, and especially on the people forming militias was missed due to full camera memory.

Welcome to blue collar Buffalo.

* * *

Clarence, NY (WKBW) -

A question and answer session on New York's new gun law turned testy, as gun owners unleash a fury of anger on the new legislation.

Frustration boiled over for people who feel as though they are law abiding citizens, being turned into criminals.

For many, it was a chance to vent anger at Albany.

One WNYer even said "You put a brown shirt on Mr. Cuomo and put him on
television, he would look just like Hitler."

Another chimed in, "Angry people get together, they form militias
folks. This country, this WNY is prime for something like that!"

Western New York gun owners say they SAFE Act and its ban on assault weapons makes no sense.

One of the big concerns -- who is footing the bill for making changes to guns that are now considered assault weapons. State officials told the crowd the gun owners are the ones responsible.

People in the crowd also had a lot of questions about the registration laws. One gun owner asked,"What is the penalty if you don't register it? 'Cause I guarantee there's a lot of people that aren't going to."

At times, advocates felt answers were incomplete or political."

Link to video (short version)


Link to video (full 33 minute version)


Connect to AAE
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

There is great turmoil in the land as Obama’s second term begins

There is great turmoil in the land as Obama’s second term begins


By James H. Shott

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) last week insisted that "we are in a recovery," and blasted Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for disparaging the economy's performance. The drop in GDP in the 4th quarter is the Republicans fault, he said, citing their austerity and brinkmanship. “Growth went down in the fourth quarter because of reduced government spending,” he said. “The economy was rejecting the austerity and brinkmanship.”

Well, if Sen. Reid is correct and the economy is recovering, things must be better than when President Barack Obama took office prior to the recession ending. Let's take a look.

On the positive side, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is bumping up against its all-time high mark of 14,164, and has regained the losses from the financial crisis.

However, since January of 2009 until just before the election last November the number of long-term unemployed had risen from 2.7 million to 4.8 million; the price of gasoline had more than doubled; there were 40 states with high unemployment compared to 22 in 2009; median household income was down 7 percent; mortgage delinquencies were up by 60 percent; the Misery Index was up 25 percent; and the National Debt had increased by 53 percent.

Today there are 1.2 million fewer jobs in America than there were then, and the number of Americans on food stamps has increased from 32 million to 46 million. The amount of money that the federal government gives directly to Americans has increased by 32 percent since 2009.

And the most recent economic news in addition to the news that for the first time since 2009 the U.S. GDP was in negative territory in the 4th quarter is that consumer confidence plunged in January to its lowest level in a year, and the unemployment rate rose to 7.9 percent for January.

Is this what Sen. Reid thinks a recovery looks like?

Actually, this is what happened to the economy because Barack Obama avoided dealing with the things that really needed attention – the economy, jobs, energy independence, etc.  – and instead wasted all of his four years playing with less-critical issues like health care, killing the coal industry, sending guns to Mexican drug dealers, wasting billions on a failed economic stimulus, and flushing money down the green energy toilet.

As the president's second term begins it is remarkable to observe the high degree of outright revolt among the states and the people over government actions and proposed actions under Mr. Obama's watch, highlighted by the feeling of a majority of Americans in a new poll that the federal government threatens their personal rights and freedoms. Fifty-three percent of 1,502 adults surveyed from January 9-13 by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press responded that government is now a threat to their freedom.

Twenty-seven states are balking over the Affordable Care Act on constitutionality and budgetary grounds, and have sued the government. Provisions of the law threaten to blow states' Medicaid expenses through the roof.

Forty-three Catholic groups have sued the government on religious freedom grounds. The Affordable Care Act forces them to provide services to their employees that violate their religious tenets, in contravention of the 1st Amendment's protection of religious freedom.

And perhaps worse, as the details of what was in the bill that no one read before voting on it leak out, we are learning of taxes and increased costs. The measure requires Americans to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and the IRS tells us the cheapest plan will cost a family $20,000 a year.

“We found that about three quarters of again, whatever you want to call them — taxes, fines, penalties — about three quarters of those costs will fall on the backs of those who make less than $120,000 a year. It’s a big punch in the stomach to middle class families," economist Steven Moore of The Wall Street Journal said. This is what passes for "affordable" to Democrat leaders.

A more serious revolt against federal initiatives results from talk of imposing a ban on assault weapons. A number of county sheriffs are refusing to assist the feds on banned weapons initiatives from the administration and Congress on constitutional grounds, should a weapons ban be put into effect. Many law enforcement officials have written letters expressing their positions on proposed bans, and one county sheriff noted that not only does every sheriff takes an oath to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution, but federal agents also take that oath, and he believes they won't enforce the bans, either.

Despite the unintended consequences of the Affordable Care Act that punishes those it was supposed to help, and the brewing constitutional crisis over banning weapons instead of addressing the root cause of mass killings, the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats go merrily along, trampling on whoever and whatever gets in their way.

We expect our government to be responsive to our wishes, and the unprecedented level of opposition to these two issues ought to command the attention of those in leadership positions, and cause them to re-evaluate the unpopular course they are following.

Cross-posted from Observations

Obama to Top Brass: Will you fire on American Citizens?

This may be the most important interview you will have seen within the last year.   I do have a little bit of skepticism associated with it...but not much.

In the video that follows, Gary Franchi of the Next News Network interviews Dr. Jim Garrow about the call he claims to have received from a retired, high-ranking military officer who told him that the Administration is beginning to ask military officers whether or not they will be willing to fire on American citizens if those citizens refuse to surrender their arms when ordered to do so.   One of the more interesting pieces in the interview is when Dr. Garrow talks about China, our debt to them, and how our natural resources are being given away to them as a way of paying off American debt to China.

I have not yet seen any corroborating evidence in regards to this reported "litmus test" of military leadership, so it is something we need to keep an eye on.  I have seen some "hits" on the Chinese being allowed into our nation to exploit our natural resources, but have not yet been able to draw any conclusions from them.

Link to video


Other commentary on this issue:
-- Rick Wiles (TRUNEWS) interview with Dr. Jim Garrow (23 Jan 13)
-- Examiner.com article "Renowned author: Obama wants military leaders who will fire on U.S. citizens" (22 Jan 13)

Cross-posted from Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Ben Swann: Truth Behind Piers Morgan's Anti-Gun "Facts"

In this video, Ben Swann of Reality Check corrects the "facts" that Piers Morgan used during his interview of Alex Jones of PrisonPlanet and Infowars.  Excellent work on his part.
  • EU named Britain as the most violent country in the EU.
  • UK has 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people, which is ahead of even South Africa (1,609 per 100,000).
  • The US has 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people.
Piers Morgan, go home.

Link to video


--Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Gun Control: Why the Rush?

Why the rush when it comes to the current push for gun control legislation (and executive orders)?

It is because those who want to control guns seek to capitalize on the current wave of emotion as a result of the Sandy Hook attack, so that there will be less of a chance that logic and reason will be brought into play.  That is why the power hungry love a crisis ("never let a crisis go to waste") so that they can take advantage of emotion and the absence, or even outright dismissal, of rational thought to achieve their own objectives.

It is therefore healthy for a free people to be skeptical of the actions of their government.  It is even more important that they do so when the government tells us such actions must be taken "quickly" to avert some sort of "tragedy."  We must force them to debate the issue using logic, facts, and reason within the framework of our Constitution to arrive at a solution, if a solution is required at all.

The current issue involves the right to bear arms as codified by the Second Amendment of our Constitution.  When any issue arises that may impact our liberties as citizens of the United States, we must deal with it in an deliberate and thoughtful manner to best safeguard our rights.  To cavalierly charge forward in a quest to solve some perceived problem has a high probability of trampling on our rights.  This may be by design, mind you, which I believe to be the case in the current issue involving our right to bear arms.

We must rationally consider the issue at hand in order to arrive at a sound solution (if a solution is necessary) that protects the freedoms of Americans.  To rush to a solution may throw away our rights in the process.

--Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Feinstein: Domestic Enemy of the Constitution

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal to Virginia Constitution, source) 
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (from Thomas Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," source)
"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380, source

As a result of her actions against the Second Amendment rights of American citizens, Senator Dianne Feinstein has proven herself to be a domestic enemy of the Constitution of the United States.  Threats of this kind to our most basic rights are intolerable and the Constitution must be defended.  Feinstein has demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of our Constitution, which she has sworn to support and defend:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."  (Oath of a Congressman)
Who will now defend the Constitution and the rights of Americans?
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."  -- Adolf Hitler, April 11 1942 (source)
The following list is taken directly from Senator Feinstein's website (Summary of Feinstein Legislation.pdf):
Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
  • 120 specifically-named firearms
  • Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
  • Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds
Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
  • Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
  • Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test
  • Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans
Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
  • Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
  • Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and
  • Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons
Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
  • Background check of owner and any transferee;
  • Type and serial number of the firearm;
  • Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
  • Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
  • Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration
Feinstein's remarks from an interview in 1995 where she tells the reporter that she would take them all if she could get the votes (unclear whether she means all types of firearms or all types of "assault weapons"):


--Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Gun Control and The Hypocrisy of Hollywood

A multitude of Hollywood actors who inhabit a world of fantasy and privilege, protected by their own security, have produced a video that demands gun control in the aftermath of Sandy Hook ("Demand a Plan to End Gun Violence").  The following video exposes their hypocrisy as these very same actors that call for an end to gun violence glorify guns, violence, and death in their "artistic" films.  AAE will normally not post something this vulgar, but it reflects Hollywood's culture.  Additionally, AAE finds the song lyrics used at the end of the video distasteful.

Warning: explicit language and graphic violence


Connect to AAE
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.