Thursday, December 27, 2012

A Little Bit of Bad News Today


By now you all should have read Dianne Feinstein's proposed Assault Weapons Ban. If you haven't, here's the executive summary, to quote NAGR head Dudley Brown:

It's the end of the Second Amendment in the United States.

For once, I'm 100% in agreement with Brown. Read the whole thing yourself. Just the concept of putting all the "grandfathered" ARs and other "evil" rifles, shotguns and handguns on the NFA list, requiring maybe 20 million Americans to go through the NFA licensing/taxation procedure to create a handy list for the confiscation that will come later — remember, under Feinstein's proposed law grandfathered guns can't be transferred, so they all end up in the government's hands eventually — is breath-taking.

The real question is, "Can it pass?"

The answer is, as written, no. Probably not even the Senate, much less the House.

I think what we see here is a stalking horse, a super radical proposal to make the crap that Greasy Joe Biden's "Blue Ribbon" coven of gun banners will excrete smell a little more like chicken salad. Feinstein is trying to set up the play for "moderate" gun reform, except that the "moderate" gun reform will be the most radical ever envisioned in the United States.

From the Power Line Blog, that agrees the Feinstein proposal is DOA:
It is hard to say, at this point, whether it is merely grandstanding by Feinstein that will soon be forgotten, or whether it represents the first shot in an all-out war against gun owners (i.e., red America) by the Democratic Party.
I tend to think this is the war we've always thought was coming. This is the Democrats' best — and last — chance to disarm America, and they're going to do everything in their power, honest or dishonest, to accomplish their goal. I hope it goes without saying that their media handmaidens are already all-in...expect a flood of polls suggesting the America public has seen huge swings in support of gun control, the endless procession of Hollywood whores and turncoat Republicans...it will all be smoke and mirrors. Trust your heart and trust your gut.

We must remember that the goal is always confiscation; no matter what they say, that's where this path leads. Tyranny always comes with little baby steps, but in the end the boxcars always roll east.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

One word...executve order....woops that was two :)

Anonymous said...

Absolutely! The Feinstein bill is a smokescreen they believe will allow them to get "Sensible" gun laws.

Michael you need to re do that flag to replace the states with gun rights organizations. Starting with the NRA at the head.

Join or die!


Harmony Hermit here in PA

Anonymous said...

If restrictive gun laws pass at the Federal level, I just can't see Texas going along with that, or a whole bunch of other states, either.

Article V of the United States Constitution: "The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

Rastus said...

For the debate I go back to truth I posted on the earlier blog. Anyone can have their opionion but we cannot have discourse without truth.

The liberal communist anti-gunners have wrapped truth in a lie...a very time honored technique straight from the pit of hell. What I say is that "you" can have an opionion but "we" cannot have discourse until "you" recognize that the GCA of 68 did not ban assault weapons, i.e. machine guns and that Reagan did limit them by presidential order (illegally I'd say) and that there is no "gun show loophole"...define it for them.

Do not engage in debate until the myths, i.e. blatant lies, "they" have swallowed are replaced with truth. Do get yourself on board with the NFA and GCA data and know what you can do with private transfers and what you cannot do with private transfers and insist they verify you before you have discourse.

When "they" find out their sources lie the antagonistic conversation is far less willing to present itself because "they" find out that "their guy" lies or is incompetent. Now have discourse, now speak but not before the foundation of truth. Make certain that you explain the gun control crowd is only engaged in this to remove all guns....not just "bad ones" that "people can agree should not be in public hands"...i.e. "THEY LIE".

Just my 2 cents again today.

Anonymous said...

The bottom line is that if anything restrictive passes the Federal Congress we know we can not count on the Supreme Court, so it will be up to the various State governments to fight this with every option at their disposal.

Anonymous said...

If the restrictive laws pass we will then find out who believes and who walks away. God bless us all for they do not know what they are attempting.

Summer in the Suburbs said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Laura Mackenzie said...

Hi Michael,

I'm a journalist with the UK news organisation ITN. Do you have an email I can contact you on? feel free to get in touch at laura.mackenzie@itn.co.uk if you'd rather not post your own on here. Many thanks.

Laura Mackenzie

Anonymous said...

see, what i cant get: why the fear about not having guns? do you really believe the "evil government", the one you or your neighbor presumably elected, is going to enslave us all unless every last one of us has a pistol in their fridge?
To my limited understanding, that was the background to the framing of the second amendment: giving right to citizens to be armed so as to be able to overthrow tyrannical rule.
Here's a newsflash: the world has turned, civilization has moved on.. the tools to protect folk are now being used to destroy us.
America has much to be proud of, the Bill Of Rights principal among them. But it has to be relevant to the times: cogent to the context of the era we live in.
Lethal weapons in the hands of partially or untrained citizenry is madness.

Anonymous said...

Sales numbers say the power is in our hands.
With aggressive leadership the question will not be what new laws they will pass, but what old ones will we let them keep.

For now.

Tom Bogan
Laconia NH

Michael Bane said...

Anon, I'll give you your preps for posting here, and thanks for not going off the deep end (I've met quota on death threats this year! LOL!). You would have been more compelling if you'd signed your name, as I do.

The Bill of Rights are NOT contextual to the times. The First Amendment protections did not anticipate the Internet; the Fourth did not anticipate drones. But they continue to form the basis of America's very rare Republic. Same with the Second.Amendment. An armed citizenry always puts constraints on the abuses of government. And yes, the world is full of examples of "peasants with primitive weapons" humbling superpowers — Vietnam and Afghanistan (twice) come to mind.

Governments do what governments do, which is accumulate power to themselves. Sometimes that power steps over a line into tyranny. As Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kosinski noted, the Second is a fail safe, when all other guarantees fail.

And they do fail.

Anon, I challenge you to stand underneath the cold, empty guard towers at Birkenau, or the "medical rooms" at Auschwitiz, and repeat the words you wrote.

I'll take the guns, thank you. And I trust 100,000 "untrained" armed civilians over one government functionary who's "only here to help!"

Michael B

kmitch200 said...

see, what i cant get: why the fear about not having guns? do you really believe the "evil government", is going to enslave us all

By enslaving, do you mean something like "send us more of your money or we'll send a SWAT team through your door?"
We already have that.

The Bill of Rights wasn't passed just for the administration in power in 1791 or just this one.
It was written for all the politicritters that want the power of the elected.

The BOR guarantees that the God given rights we ALREADY HAVE will not be trampled on.
All of them.
Whether you choose to exercise those rights is up to you, not the government.

Rastus said...

The height of arrogance may be the failure to apply history to one's own world context. That is to say that being snug in one's subculture in no way isolates one from the mechanics of the larger culture as evidenced by the Killing Fields in Cambodia, Auschwitz, Stalin's murder of perhaps 10+ million, Kosovo, etc.

Cannot happen here? Why not pray tell? Arrogance personified is to believe that the nation we were persists as we have become the nation we were not. Genocidal actions and desiresw have not disappeard are ongoing across the world--get your head out of the sand. Iran wants Israel killed down to the last woman and child...a stated goal by a national leader and government...use your heads people. Anonymous, thou art either simple-minded or a party to people desiring the downfall of a once great nation.

Rob Drummond said...

I am with Michael I would rather trust 100,000 armed citizens here in the US than one tyranical goverment.

The US Government is not tyranical yet but it is getting overbearing in it's reach of power. I don't want a government, any government telling me how to think, what to do, checking on who I associate with, etc. Nor do I care to have those PC ideals forced upon me by the Media, any media. Do you realize that the other day the Westchester Journal News(Weschester County,NY)published a map of all the current handgun licence holders in three different countys and had a map that showed where they lived along with addresses too. They said they did it so people would know where the guns were for safety's sake....probably in an effort to "Out" them too. In my mind that is similar & leading toward wearing a Star of David or some other identification to point us out.

Never thought I'd see this in my lifetime. One more thing, I own a gun (actually many), I haven't broken the law, I plan on keeping my gun, and I always sign my name.
Rob Drummond
Hillsboro, NH

nj larry said...

Pls note that feinsteins bill BANS ALL HANDGUNS. The focus has been on black rifles but this is now recognized by the NRA. Click on the link in the article for the "full story "

http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx

D said...

It seems both directions of the issue are growing. New Hampshire has had a mandate, again, this election cycle which instituted an actual 'nanny' state consisting of leftist women acting as our representatives and Governor. We lost our Committees on the Constitutional review, Petition for Redress, and Right to Bear Arms in the State Capital building. All the while firearms businesses are sold out, blogs are beating USpravda, and the candle of Liberty continues to flicker..

Randy Haskins said...

Obama has been able to shove everything he has wanted down our throats so far no matter how many did not want it. I don't know how we are going to stop this.

R.H.