tagged w/ 2nd Amendment
-
WASHINGTON -- Faced with a Congress hostile to even slight restrictions of Second Amendment rights, the Obama administration is exploring potential changes to gun laws that can be secured strictly through executive action, administration officials say.
The Department of Justice held the first in what is expected to be a series of meetings on Tuesday afternoon with a group of stakeholders in the ongoing gun-policy debates. Before the meeting, officials said part of the discussion was expected to center around the White House's options for shaping policy on its own or through its adjoining agencies and departments -- on issues ranging from beefing up background checks to encouraging better data-sharing.
Administration officials said talk of executive orders or agency action are among a host of options that President Barack Obama and his advisers are considering. “The purpose of these discussions is to be a productive exchange of good ideas from folks across the spectrum,” one official said. “We think that’s a good place to start.”
But the coalition-building didn’t start off on a promising note. The National Rifle Association responded to the op-ed by arguing that Obama had missed the point “entirely” in ignoring lax law enforcement and shortcomings in the nation's mental health system.
The NRA’s response crystallized what administration officials and gun control advocates have long known to be a major potential roadblock in any reform effort: a policy approach that gives off even the hint of restricting access to firearms will be met with forceful opposition by the gun lobby and its allies.
Even when Democrats attempted to limit the ability of outside interest groups to make anonymous campaign donations, they ultimately exempted the NRA for fear that the group would derail the entire enterprise. And so, the conversation has drifted towards executive action.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/15/obama-gun-laws-congress_n_836138.htmlWASHINGTON -- Faced with a Congress hostile to even slight restrictions of Second... more
-
-
“Nullification” dates back to 1798, when James Madison and Thomas Jefferson drafted the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, respectively. There we read that the states, which created the federal government in the first place, by the very logic of what they had done must possess some kind of defense mechanism should their creation break free of the restraints they had imposed on it. Jefferson himself introduced the word “nullification” into the American political lexicon, by which he meant the indispensable power of a state to refuse to allow an unconstitutional federal law to be enforced within its borders.
http://youtu.be/hxxJYbZktyQ“Nullification” dates back to 1798, when James Madison and Thomas... more
-
-
-
Authorities don't plan to file charges against an 18-year-old Oklahoma widow who fatally shot a New Year's Eve intruder at her house while she had a 911 dispatcher on the phone.
However, the intruder's alleged accomplice has been charged with murder in connection with the death.
Sarah McKinley was in her mobile home with her 3-month-old son on New Year's Eve in Blanchard, Okla., when Justin Martin, 24, broke in with a large hunting knife, NBC station KFOR reported.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When she asked if she was allowed to shoot the intruder if he broke through the door, a 911 operator told her, "Well, you have to do whatever you can do to protect yourself ... I can't tell you that you can do that but you do what you have to do to protect your baby."
Oklahoma law allows the use of deadly force against intruders, and prosecutors said McKinley clearly acted in self-defense. According to court documents, Martin was holding a knife when he died.
"Our initial review of the case doesn't indicate she violated the law in any way," Assistant District Attorney James Walters told The Oklahoman newspaper.
Prosecutors have charged his alleged accomplice, 29-year-old Dustin Louis Stewart, with first-degree murder. According to authorities, Stewart was with Martin but ran away from McKinley's home after hearing the gunshots.
"When you're engaged in a crime such as first-degree burglary and a death results from the events of that crime, you're subject to prosecution for it," Walters said.
Barricaded door
Stewart was arraigned Wednesday and was being held in the Grady County jail. A bond hearing was set for Thursday. His attorney, Stephen Buzin, did not immediately respond to a message left at his office Wednesday night.
According to court documents, Martin and Stewart might have been looking for prescription drugs used by McKinley's husband Kenneth, 58, who died on Christmas Day after being hospitalized with complications from lung cancer.
McKinley said it took the men about 20 minutes to get through her door, which she had barricaded with a couch.
•911 to teen mom who killed intruder: 'Protect your baby'
McKinley told KFOR-TV the slain intruder had also showed up at her door on Dec. 29, the day of her husband's funeral.
When he came again on New Year's Eve, she said she grabbed her son and "walked over and got the 12-gauge, went in the bedroom and got the pistol and put the bottle in his mouth and then I called 911," she told KOCO.
The 911 operator asked McKinley to confirm that her doors were locked. The young mother said yes, and asked if it was all right for her to shoot the man if he were to enter her house, KOCO reported.
McKinley said she asked the dispatcher, "I've got two guns in my hand -- is it OK to shoot him if he comes in this door? I'm here by myself with my infant baby, can I please get a dispatcher out here immediately?"
'I shot him'
The 911 conversation lasted for 21 minutes. Then the door gave in. Martin charged at McKinley with his knife, but she said she shot at him before he could get to her.
"I waited till he got in the door. They said I couldn't shoot him until he was inside the house. So I waited until he got in the door and then I shot him," McKinley told KFOR.
The decision to shoot was difficult, she told KFOR. "There's nothing more dangerous than a mother with her baby. But I wouldn't have done it if it wasn't for him."
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/05/9968356-no-charges-for-teen-widow-who-killed-intruderAuthorities don't plan to file charges against an 18-year-old Oklahoma widow who... more
-
-
She probably would have been killed had she waited for the police instead of excercising her 2nd amendment rights.
***
A recently widowed teen mom shot and killed an intruder to protect her 3-month-old son on New Year's Eve after asking the 911 operator for permission, local media reported.
Sarah McKinley, 18, was alone with her son in their Blanchard, Okla., home about 2 p.m. Dec. 31 when two men tried to break in, the Oklahoman said. McKinley's husband had just passed away from lung cancer on Christmas Day.
McKinley grabbed a shotgun, called 911 and begged the operator to send help.
She stayed on the line for a terrifying 21 minutes and asked the dispatcher if it was all right to shoot if the men forced their way in.
"I can't tell you that you can do that, but you do what you have to do to protect your baby," the dispatcher told her, according to ABC News.
The young mom fired when Justin Martin, 24, who was wielding a 12-inch knife, kicked his way through the door.
Police arrived to find Martin lying dead on the sofa McKinley had used to barricade the front door, according to Oklahoma's News 9.
His alleged accomplice, Dustin Stewart, 29, was arrested and jailed.
"It's not an easy decision to make, but it was either going to be him or my son," McKinley told local TV station KOCO. "And it wasn't going to be my son. There's nothing more dangerous than a woman with a child."
Police say that McKinley was justified in taking action against the intruders once they entered her home.She probably would have been killed had she waited for the police instead of... more
-
-
Thousands of Americans will be finding guns in their Christmas stockings this year, after the biggest one-day buy-up on record.
Black Friday set the biggest one-day record of background check requests for hopeful gun buyers, eclipsing the previous record by 32 per cent, according to the FBI.
The agency received 129,166 requests for the instant background checks required for all
firearm buyers in the US. The previous high was Black Friday 2008, when 97,848 Prospective firearm owners hit the streets.Thousands of Americans will be finding guns in their Christmas stockings this year,... more
-
-
Remember when Obama undoing what Bush did and getting back to the Consitution was cool and popular? Turns out Obama has still been as bad as Bush and even worse in some cases.
***
Last week, the top lawyer and 34-year-veteran of the CIA, John Rizzo, explained to PBS' Frontline that Obama has "changed virtually nothing" from Bush policies in these areas, and this week, the ACLU explains that "most [Bush] policies remain core elements of our national security strategy today."
At some point very soon, this basic truth will be impossible to deny with a straight face even for the most hardened loyalists of both parties, each of whom have been eager, for their own reasons, to deny it (and even the two differences cited there, though positive, are wildly exaggerated by Obama defenders: the torture techniques authorized by Bush were no longer in use and the CIA black sites were empty by the time Obama was inaugurated; by contrast, there is ample evidence that the Obama administration continues to use torture by proxy and rendition/CIA-black-sites by proxy as well).
The report is broken down into sections/chapters, and here are a few highlights:
The ACLU then devotes an entire chapter to the way in which immunity for America's torturers -- bestowed jointly by President Obama and a judicial branch meekly deferential to his and Bush's claims of state secrecy -- has contaminated and degraded the entire justice system and made the future reintroduction of torture a virtual inevitability:
This Surveillance State, like most other Bush/Obama Terrorism policies, is justified by a never-ending orgy of fear-mongering. But other than the enrichment of the private Security State industry (see here and here).
A separate chapter is devoted to what the ACLU calls "A Massive and Unchecked Surveillance Society." It explains: "Using Patriot Act authority, the Bush Administration started -- and the Obama Administration has continued -- to conduct wholesale 'preventive' surveillance of innocent Americans without judicial review." And "the result is a national surveillance society in which Americans’ right to privacy is under unprecedented siege." But little is known about exactly what is being done by this purely unaccountable hidden government -- what The Washington Post calls "Top Secret America" -- because of this:
Pointing to that core theory of both presidencies, the ACLU dispatches one of the most misleading claims of Obama defenders: that the President's failure to close Guantanamo is due exclusively to Congressional obstructionism; in fact, long before Congress acted at all with regard to that camp, the President announced his intention to continue its core injustice -- indefinite detention -- albeit in a different locale:
During the Bush era, the actions and condemnations of the ACLU received ample positive attention from progressives. That, of course, is no longer true, and this damning report will likely be ignored in most of those circles, just as this truly remarkable comment from the ACLU's Executive Director has been. And, as usual, anyone urging that attention be paid to these facts will be met with demands that eyes be diverted instead to how scary Sarah Palin Christine O'Donnell Michele Bachmann Rick Perry is, and then this will all blissfully fade away in a cloud of partisan electioneering even with the election more than a year away.
Either way, this creeping unchecked authoritarianism marches forward unabated, and is now -- rather than the province of the right-wing GOP -- fully bipartisan consensus. I really don't understand how progressives think they'll be taken seriously the next time there is a GOP President and they try to resurrect their feigned concern for these matters; they'll be every bit as credible as conservatives who pretend to be deficit-warriors and defenders of restrained government only when the other party is in power.Remember when Obama undoing what Bush did and getting back to the Consitution was cool... more
-
-
I'm no fan of the Tea Party, but I'm a little turned off by the constant demonization, dehumanization and hypocrisy by those on the left who purport to be anti-hate, humanists ect.
Where is the Southern Povery Law Center wringing their hands about hate and violence toward a particular group? Where is the Anti-Defamation League denouncing the portrayal of right wing Americans as Zombies where the player can simply blow them away with an automatic weapon?
What kind of message does this send to American children, who are constantly turning to be out Jared Lee Loughner psychopaths or violent anti-racists like Harris and Klebold, the Columbine Killers?
Let's turn this around and say that a corporate funded right wing group produced a video game about murdering the DNC, pro-Illegal immigration and pro-abortion groups along with Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow and other liberal pundits.
We'd never hear the end of it!
***
In a new free-to-play online game that's sure to worry as many on the left as on the right, players are sent on a mission to kill "tea party zombies," Fox News anchors, Republican politicians, lobbyists and even activists, using weapons like machine guns, shotguns, crowbars and machetes.
Though entirely based tongue-in-cheek, "Tea Party Zombies Must Die" contains politically provocative imagery, like walking through the offices of Koch Industries wielding a shotgun, or attending a sparsely populated tea party rally and killing activists with a crowbar.
It contains a variety of enemies, such as: "Generic pissed off old white guy;" "Pissed off stupid white trash redneck birther zombie;" "Expresses racist views anonymously on the internet modern klan zombie;" "Factory made blond Fox News barbie who has never had a problem in her life zombie;" "The 'we tricked the God people into believing in tax cuts for the rich' executive zombie;" and the "Koch Industries 'Koch whore' lobbyist pig zombie."I'm no fan of the Tea Party, but I'm a little turned off by the constant... more
-
-
A good article on both sides of the second amendment gun control debate.
Obviously, the 2nd Amendment is going to play very heavily in the 2012 debate with the possibility of a total financial collapse on the horizon, anti-2nd Amendment groups are likely to try and capitalize on that in the unfortunate event that it happens.
***
It was May 2, 1967, and the Black Panthers’ invasion of the California statehouse launched the modern gun-rights movement. On the west lawn of the state capitol in Sacramento 30 young black men and women [arrived] carrying .357 Magnums, 12-gauge shotguns, and .45-caliber pistols. The 24 men and six women climbed the capitol steps, and one man, Bobby Seale, began to read from a prepared statement. “The time has come for black people to arm themselves against this terror before it is too late.”
Opposition to gun control as what drove the black militants to visit the California capitol with loaded weapons in hand. The Black Panther Party had been formed six months earlier, in Oakland, by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. Like many young African Americans, Newton and Seale were frustrated with the failed promise of the civil-rights movement. Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were legal landmarks, but they had yet to deliver equal opportunity. In Newton and Seale’s view, the only tangible outcome of the civil-rights movement had been more violence and oppression, much of it committed by the very entity meant to protect and serve the public: the police.
Inspired by the teachings of Malcolm X, Newton and Seale decided to fight back. Before he was assassinated in 1965, Malcolm X had preached against Martin Luther King Jr.’s brand of nonviolent resistance. Because the government was “either unable or unwilling to protect the lives and property” of blacks, he said, they had to defend themselves “by whatever means necessary.” Malcolm X illustrated the idea for Ebony magazine by posing for photographs in suit and tie, peering out a window with an M-1 carbine semiautomatic in hand. Malcolm X and the Panthers described their right to use guns in self-defense in constitutional terms. “Article number two of the constitutional amendments,” Malcolm X argued, “provides you and me the right to own a rifle or a shotgun.”
The Pathers’ efforts provoked an immediate backlash. Republicans in California eagerly supported increased gun control. Governor Reagan told reporters that afternoon that he saw “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.” He called guns a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.” In a later press conference, Reagan said he didn’t “know of any sportsman who leaves his home with a gun to go out into the field to hunt or for target shooting who carries that gun loaded.” The Mulford Act, he said, “would work no hardship on the honest citizen.”A good article on both sides of the second amendment gun control debate.... more
-
-
At least one person in the White House knew about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives gun-running operation three months before weapons from the botched sting were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.
That’s what a high-ranking ATF official told Congress on Tuesday.
William Newell, the former ATF special agent in charge of the Phoenix field office, told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that he communicated with Kevin O'Reilly, a staffer on President Obama’s National Security Council, about Operation Fast and Furious in September 2010.
At a June 29, 2011 press conference, Obama told reporters, “As you know, my attorney general has made clear he certainly would not have ordered gun running to pass through into Mexico.”
Obama noted that an investigation conducted by the Justice Department’s inspector-general is still ongoing. “I’m not going to comment on the current investigation. I’ve made very clear my views that that would not be an appropriate step by the ATF, and we’ve got to find out how that happened. As soon as the investigation is complete, appropriate action will be taken,” Obama said.At least one person in the White House knew about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,... more
-
-
Nowadays in most states, the police can just come in your home and shoot everyone on site with little or no evidence of any wrongdoing, and it's against the law to protect yourself against armed thugs with badges.
***
"How have we come down to this? It did not happen overnight, and this has been the result of decades of extreme-right-wing views of the role of "law-enforcement" polices throughout this country. The very first problem with the entire concept stems from the definition of "law·en·force·ment." The term infers that there are laws that need to be enforced; but the fact is there are no longer any "laws" that govern the behavior of those in uniform.
This brings us to the latest version of lawless-behavior by a SWAT TEAM in Tucson, Arizona. This nameless and faceless "TEAM" murdered an ex-marine in his own home, with 71 shots which were fired at him without reason: and basically without warning. All the members of this TEAM should be profiled in the local papers, with their pictures and home addresses published, along with the records of their entire-service to the despicable Tucson Police Department that routinely utilizes their illegal-services (murder-for-hire). If Tucson cops were any-good at their so-called jobs then the number of home-invasions would not be the problem that they definitely are today!
Is the USA now nothing but a holding-pen for unnamed suspects that can be murdered at random; if so, then we need to know that! If this situation is not directly and publicly addressed then things like Vigilantism could well begin to make a comeback among the population. Because no people can be targeted as we have been TARGETED, for very long without producing an equal and opposite REACTION to these illegal and outrageous behaviors by those that are supposed to protect the public and not simply brutalize and murder us."
contNowadays in most states, the police can just come in your home and shoot everyone on... more
-
-
Read this quote from Obama about regulating guns "Under the radar"
"On March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, Jim Brady, who sustained a debilitating head wound in the attack, and his wife, Sarah, came to Capitol Hill to push for a ban on the controversial “large magazines.” Brady, for whom the law requiring background checks on handgun purchasers is named, then met with White House press secretary Jay Carney. During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.
“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”
In the meeting, she said, Obama discussed how records get into the system and what can be done about firearms retailers. Her husband specifically brought up the proposed ban on large magazine clips, and she noted that even former vice president Dick Cheney had suggested that some restrictions on the clips might make sense.
“He just laughed,” Sarah Brady said approvingly of the president. Both she and her husband, she emphasized, had absolute confidence that the president was committed to regulation."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/over-a-barrel-meet-white-house-gun-policy-adviser-steve-croley/2011/04/04/AFt9EKND_story_2.htmlRead this quote from Obama about regulating guns "Under the radar"... more
-
-
Lucky to be alive...
*****
When a burly ex-convict forced his way into a posh Florida home last week, he had no idea what awaited him -- a 25-year-old beauty queen with a pink .38-caliber handgun.
Meghan Brown, a former Florida pageant queen, shot and killed 42-year-old Albert Franklin Hill during a home invasion March 12 at the 2,732-square-foot house she shares with
her fiance in Tierra Verde, Fla
.
The woman’s fiance, Robert Planthaber, said in an interview that he was quickly awakened by the altercation and ran to Brown’s side.
"I attacked him and took a severe beating to the head," Planthaber told FoxNews.com. "But I got him off of her long enough for her to scramble to the room where she keeps
her pink .38 special.”
Brown, who reigned as the 2009 Miss Tierra Verde, snatched her gun from a nearby bedroom and shot the suspect several times – hitting him in the chest, groin, thigh and
back, her fiance said. Hill was pronounced dead at the scene.Lucky to be alive...
*****
When a burly ex-convict forced his way into a posh... more
-
-
A historic right to carry lawsuit is currently taking place in the state of New Jersey. The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC), and 6 plaintiffs have filed suit against several New Jersey officials for deprivation of civil rights under color of law.
The 6 plaintiffs---who are private citizens---had their gun permits denied on the grounds that they had not proven "justifiable need" to own a firearm.
One of the plaintiffs is a kidnap victim, another is a part-time sheriff's deputy, another keeps large amounts of cash in his private business and a fourth is a civilian employee of the FBI who is fearful of attack from a radical Islamic fundamentalist group.
If these people are denied firearm permits, then who can legally own a gun in New Jersey?
New Jersey courts claim that the Second Amendment only applies inside the home. Where is that in the Constitution? "The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Where does it say, "only in the home?"
The Attorney General has defended New Jersey's ridiculous existing laws and moved to dismiss the case. It is clear that "SOME" liberals will do anything to limit a person's right to defend themselves---even if it means making up a whole new clause in the Constitution.
Law-abiding New Jersey citizens have been arbitrarily deprived of their ability to defend themselves and their families for years. The law grants uncontrolled discretion to police chiefs and other public officials to deny license applications even in cases where the applicant has shown a clear and present danger exists.
Supreme Court rulings have made it clear that the Second Amendment gives us the right to carry a handgun for self-defense.
What does the State of New Jersey consider a justifiable need? Do citizens need guns to their heads or knives to their throats before they are allowed by the State to protect themselves? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6nBK7Yx2Ig
Please CLICK THE LINK to donate to the Second Amendment Foundation as we continue to defend our Constitutional right to bear arms.
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf/?a=5780A historic right to carry lawsuit is currently taking place in the state of New... more
-
-
Texas is preparing to give college students and professors the right to carry guns on campus, adding momentum to a national campaign to open this part of society to firearms.
More than half the members of the Texas House have signed on as co-authors of a measure directing universities to allow concealed handguns. The Senate passed a similar bill in 2009 and is expected to do so again. Republican Gov. Rick Perry, who sometimes packs a pistol when he jogs, has said he's in favor of the idea.
Texas has become a prime battleground for the issue because of its gun culture and its size, with 38 public universities and more than 500,000 students. It would become the second state, following Utah, to pass such a broad-based law. Colorado gives colleges the option and several have allowed handguns.Texas is preparing to give college students and professors the right to carry guns on... more
-
-
They will never stop until there are no more guns.
They will stop when only the police, who are not punished when they murder people, and the drug dealers will be the only one with guns, just like in Mexico.
****
Obama intentionally did not mention gun control in his State of the Union, but aides say that in the next two weeks the administration will unveil a campaign to get Congress to toughen existing laws.
That was intentional, according to the White House. An administration official says Obama didn’t mention guns in his speech because of the omnipresent controversy surrounding the Second Amendment and gun control. Tuesday’s speech was designed to be more about the economy and how, as Obama repeated nine times, the U.S. could “win the future.”
But in the next two weeks, the White House will unveil a new gun-control effort in which it will urge Congress to strengthen current laws, which now allow some mentally unstable people, such as alleged Arizona shooter Jared Loughner, to obtain certain assault weapons, in some cases without even a background check.
Tuesday night after the speech, Obama adviser David Plouffe said to NBC News that the president would not let the moment after the Arizona shootings pass without pushing for some change in the law, to prevent another similar incident. “It’s a very important issue, and one I know there’s going to be debate about on the Hill.”They will never stop until there are no more guns.
They will stop when only the... more
-
-
Everytime there is a shooting that the media decides to make into an event, the political opportunists who hate free speech and gun rights (the ADL and the SPLC in particular) crawl out of the woodwork and start urging politicians to crank out the anti-free speech and anti-gun legislation.
And yes that is the infamous gun-grabber Senator Chuck Schumer with a deadly weapon and a big smile enjoying him some 2nd Amendment.
***
In an op-ed for The Hill published Monday, Paul sharply denounced the violence in Tucson last Saturday, but said that "some have attempted to use this tragedy to discredit philosophical adversaries or score political points. This sort of opportunism is simply despicable."
"This always seems to be the knee jerk reaction to any crime committed with a gun," Paul wrote. "Nonsensical proposals to outlaw guns around federal officials and install bulletproof barriers in the congressional gallery only reinforce the growing perception that politicians view their own lives as far more important than the lives of ordinary citizens."Everytime there is a shooting that the media decides to make into an event, the... more
-
-
Is the Loughner Massacre the crisis this White House and Congress have been waiting for?
Alex Jones issues an alert via a special video address as certain factions in Congress are moving very quickly to seize upon the tragic shooting in Arizona to pass both gun control laws and restrict free speech under the guise of protecting political servants.
The emerging background of Jared Lee Loughner clearly indicates a deeply mentally disturbed individual, but many in Congress cannot wait for all the details of his motivation to emerge before hurrying legislation through Capitol Hill this week. They have teamed up with the mainstream corporate media to pose as concerned liberals trying to protect the weak, while forcefully demanding draconian restrictions on the Bill of Rights.
The rush is on to prey upon sentiments while they are still fresh. They will use this tragedy to usher in an agenda the Obama Administration couldn’t otherwise advance, but have long planned for. Top Obama and Clinton advisors like Robert Shapiro have cryptically warned for months that only an Oklahoma City or 9/11-style incident could save Obama’s presidency. Former Obama White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel famously quipped that “You never want to let a good crisis go to waste.” Is the Loughner Massacre the crisis this White House and Congress have been waiting for?
For gun legislation, there’s been no useful momentum until now. Holder and Obama heralded the return of the assault weapons ban early on in 2009, but the focus has always been on the available political currency. But with a ripe tragedy that rightfully shocked the nation at hand, Rep. McCarthy and other dedicated gun grabbers in Congress have rallied, ready to ‘look at what I can pass.’ McCarthy has eyed banning the 30-count clip used by the accused killer, one of the expired provisions of the Assault Weapons Ban she and others got under Clinton.
Meanwhile, Congressman Robert Brady plans openly to ride on the backs of Giffords’ attempted assassination and the murder of 5 others as well, with plans to “criminalize” threatening language or symbols against members of Congress. Like well-laid plans for anti-gun legislation, the Democrats have long plotted an avenue to impose the Fairness Doctrine over the realm of talk radio. In the name of protecting our elected officials, Brady will help chill political speech, starting with the banning of over-zealous rhetoric like the well publicized example of Sarah Palin’s map which placed a “target” over a number of districts including that of Rep. Giffords.
Despite the fact that the father of slain 9-year old Christina Taylor Green demanded the press not use his daughter’s death to restrict civil liberties, the public figures involved have lined up to grandstand over the incident and exploit the madness of accused murderer Jared Lee Loughner.
Pima County Sheriff Dupnik lead the demands to reign in speech and tone down the rhetoric, lambasting the “vitriol” of pundits and politicians, openly challenging their right to express and defend their views and stating in his press conference that those who talk for a living ‘have free speech,’ but that such speech bears ‘consequences.’
“When the rhetoric about hatred, about mistrust of government, about paranoia of how government operates, and to try to inflame the public on a daily basis, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, it has impact on people especially who are unbalanced personalities,” Dupnik said.
Plenty of others, including Mark Potok of the SPLC, followed Dupnik in implicitly blaming the actions of the suspected shooter on a cocktail of voices in the “radical right” whose angry sentiment has risen to the surface since the 2010 midterm election season.
Those in Congress, however, have already reciprocated with immediate proposals for legislation. The overtones are reminiscent of the rushed and pressured passing of the Constitution-shredding PATRIOT Act in the wake of 9/11. Now, as the War on Terror– supposedly justified by the September 11 attacks– has shifted into the war of suspicion against the American people, returning veterans, political dissidents and others, certain factions in Congress now want to cut again at the Constitution and Bill of Rights, imposing the burden for the malicious and evil actions of one individual on the free speech and 2nd Amendment of everyone in the national conversation and political discourse.
Now, a decade after all Americans gave up a number of their rights in turn for the auspices of ‘security’ following 9/11, some of the most ‘vitriolic’ and supposedly ‘angry’ voices in politics, along with the others, will be asked to give up their freedom to words and expression so we can again feel a little bit “safer.” But it won’t work. Bad people and criminals will still get guns; insulating politicians will only advance tyranny’s shadowy ascent; and chilling free speech will only bring martial law control over the people closer still.
As Benjamin Franklin wisely warned in the founding era, “Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither“ (and will obtain neither).
http://www.prisonplanet.com/a-warning-to-enemies-of-the-1st-and-2nd-amendments.htmlIs the Loughner Massacre the crisis this White House and Congress have been waiting... more
-
-
Never let a good crisis go to waste. The usual suspects who eventually want a total gun ban are already seizing upon the opportunity to take away the rights of an entire society for the bad action of one person.
Gun control activists cried it was time to reform weapons laws in the United States, almost immediately after a gunman killed six and injured 14 more, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, in Arizona on Saturday.
Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) said he’s preparing to introduce a similar bill in the Senate.Never let a good crisis go to waste. The usual suspects who eventually want a total... more
-
-
Here in the greatest country in the world, or so we’re told, we have a great deal of rights. We are pretty much free to live our lives the way we choose and within a certain set of boundaries, possess whatever makes us happy.
However there are two things that have severely passionate groups behind them and both of them receive undeserved stigma.
If you take a look at that good old Bill of Rights, it doesn’t take long to find out that the founding fathers wanted you to be strapped, however we still debate this subject every single day.Here in the greatest country in the world, or so we’re told, we have a great... more
-
