OBAMA "DEMANDS" SHERIFFS ENFORCE GUN BANS - MANY SHERIFF DEPTMENTS REFUSE TO COMPLY

http://dancingczars.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/obama-demands-sheriffs-enforce-gun-bans-many-sheriffs-departments-refuse-to-comply/

OK - now you have to live up to being "bad boys"!  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?  Cave or deputize everyone in your county and distribute weapons and ammo to your people?

You are charged by your oath to protect the Constitution.  Now it's time to do your jobs.

GOA - HERE'S WHERE WE ARE ON OBAMA'S GUN CONTROL PROPOSALS

Gun Owners of America Here’s where we are on Obama's gun control proposals: Today, the Nut-Left Democrats on the Senate Judiciary voted to report the Feinstein gun ban –which could ban between 50% and 80% of guns and magazines in circulation today. It may not even get a majority in the Senate – much less the 60 votes needed to pass. And it is being pushed primarily to allow anti-gun Democrats from pro-gun states to pretend to be pro-gun. Tuesday, the Judiciary Committee passed, by a 10-to-8 vote, the universal gun registry bill. Chief sponsor Chuck Schumer has been unable to achieve Republican support from anyone other than the anti-gun Illinois Republican Mark Kirk. Therefore, unless another Republican sells out at the last minute, we believe we can successfully filibuster this ill in the full Senate. Tuesday, by a vote of 14-to-4, the Judiciary Committee also reported a Boxer bill that would increase, by $10 million, the funding for an existing school safety program. The money could be used for armed guards, as the NRA proposes, or it could be used for an anti-gun study. It is therefore neither inherently “pro-gun” nor “anti-gun.” We have said we would oppose proceeding to Boxer if it is a vehicle for votes on other anti-gun measures – but that we would not object to its passage, without amendment, by “unanimous consent.” This brings us to the central battlefield: Last week, the committee reported, by a vote of 11-to-7, the Veterans Gun Ban, S. 54. The lone GOP vote in favor came from Chuck Grassley, who indicated he would oppose the bill on the Senate floor unless it was improved from the committee-reported version. As we see it, the chief strategic objective is now to keep gun control votes from coming to the Senate floor by opposing the “motion to proceed” to any bill which is going to be used as a vehicle for gun votes.   That would certainly mean that senators should oppose moving to proceed to universal gun registries or the Veterans Gun Ban. But it also means that we oppose moving to proceed to so-called non-controversial bills, such as Boxer, if those bills are being brought up as a vehicle for anti-gun amendments.   ACTION: Click here to contact your senator. Ask him to oppose any motion to proceed – by filibuster if necessary – to the Feinstein gun ban, the universal gun registry bill, the Veterans Gun Ban (S. 54), or to any other piece of legislation being brought up as a vehicle for votes on these anti-gun proposals.      Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will bounce back as undeliverable. Please forward this e-mail to friends and family Gun Owners of America 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102 Springfield, VA 22151 703-321-8585 www.gunowners.org Contact Form If this alert was forwarded to you, you can subscribe to receive alerts directly by clicking here.

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.

BAN IT HARDER - OBAMA'S ARMOR PIERCING BULLETS SUGGESTION

http://pjmedia.com/blog/ban-it-harder-obamas-armor-piercing-bullets-suggestion/

THERE IS NO GUN CONTROL, ONLY PEOPLE CONTROL - BONGINO

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/02/21/bongino/

NY ASSEMBLYMAN STEVE MCLAUGHLIN: NO FUNDING TO MAKE NEW GUN CONTROL WORK (EXCEPT MAYBE TAX YOUR ASSES INTO SUBMISSION)

http://themadjewess.com/2013/02/11/steve-mclaughlin-assemblyman-ny-no-funding-to-make-new-gun-control-work/

New York - my home turf...PLEASE DON'T BE SO STUPID THAT YOU ARE PARALYZED  DEAF, DUMB AND BLIND TO CUOMO. BLOOMBERGAND THE LEFTWING RADICALS THAT INHABIT CAPITOL HILL.  DON'T YOU HAVE ANY COMMON SENSE LEFT?  PLEASE SAY YOU DO!  THEN ACT LIKE IT!

Don't wake and walk afraid into your life or your city.  If you are one of those full of fear, you are walking alone and naked. Don't be afraid of a gun.  Just take a firearms course and say NO to your mayor and NO to your governor because I know you're smarter than that.  Mandatory gun registration is dangerous...to you.  It is a database in the hands of Big Brother; after that comes door-to-door confiscation.  It's the natural progression of tyranny.  Don't let it happen to you.  

Just remember playing in the snow with your friends, making forts and having snowball fights.  It's a pretty good analogy for today.
You fought back didn't you?  Raymond nextdoor threw an iceball at me once - we were playing under the streetlights after snow dumped a foot or so on us during the day.  He hit me in the eye with it.  And even though it hurt for a couple of days, I had the satisfaction of getting him back. 

We live in treacherous, dangerous times, but the danger doesn't come from a nut job, a lunatic or a gang member.  It comes from our own enemy within, and that is our brainwashing, emotion pandering politicians who are not following their oaths, to us or the Constitution.  And the Constitution and the Second Amendment stand between all of us and the dictator.

 

SHERIFF'S AND LEGISLATORS ARE ACTING TO NULLIFY OBAMA GUN CONTROLS

http://minutemennews.com/2013/02/sheriffs-and-legislators-are-acting-to-nullify-obama-gun-controls/

FROM GOA: A SNAPSHOPT OF THE WORLD WHERE GUN CONTROL WINS

http://gunowners.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/a-snapshot-of-the-world-where-gun-control-wins/

SEN. TED CRUZ CALLS OUT OBAMA ON GUN CONTROL HYPOCRISY

http://shark-tank.net/2013/01/20/sen-ted-cruz-calls-out-obama-gun-control-hypocrisy/

STATES PULLING RUG OUT FROM UNDER OBAMA GUN PLANS

http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/states-pulling-rug-from-under-obama-gun-plans/#TbrxLa7gm7HLHHg6.03

OBAMA GOES NUTS AND OFFERS ANTI-GUNNERS WISH LIST - THE TOP ANTI-GUN FANATIC DICTATOR SPEAKS!

Gun Owners of America Obama Goes Nuts and Offers Anti-gunners Wish List Most of his crazy proposals are so extreme, only few of his initiatives pose serious threat   Surrounded by child-props, Barack Obama yesterday proposed a semi-automatic ban so extreme that it could potentially outlaw up to 50% of all long guns in circulation and up to 80% of all handguns.     Originally, Obama's allies had announced they would reintroduce the 1994 ban on commonly-owned, defensive firearms.  That was until they found out that they would look like fools, since that semi-auto ban was largely the law of Connecticut on the day the Newtown shooting occurred -- and didn't cover Adam Lanza's AR-15.  After that, gun grabbers just kept adding more and more guns until they would register (or ban) a huge percentage of the defensive guns in existence.   So where are we now?   Obama's crazy gun ban is now being denounced by many Democrats. And, although you don't "pop the cork" until Congress adjourns, it will probably take the magazine ban down the toilet with it.   This means that gun owners' focus must now shift to the part of Obama's agenda which poses the most danger because it is most likely to move:  the requirement that the government approve every gun transfer in America -- the so-called universal background check.   All of you know why this is a problem.  But how do you explain it so simply that even a congressman can understand?  Let's take a crack at that:   ONE:  THE FBI'S "SECRET LIST" WHICH IS BEING USED TO BAR AMERICANS FROM OWNING GUNS IS INSIDIOUS   The FBI’s database currently contains the names of more than 150,000 veterans.  They served their country honorably.  They did nothing wrong.  But, because they sought counseling for a traumatic experience while risking their lives for America, they have had their constitutional rights summarily revoked, with no due process whatsoever.   You want to know something else?  The "secret list" could soon include tens of millions of Americans -- including soldiers, police, and fire fighters -- with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and even post-partem depression.  This would be achieved under the 23 anti-gun "executive actions" that Obama announced yesterday.     TWO:  THE FBI REFUSES TO INSURE US THAT IT ISN'T TURNING ITS "SECRET LIST" INTO A NATIONAL GUN REGISTRY   Our legislative counsel drafted the Smith amendment in 1998 to prohibit the FBI from using the Brady Check system to tax gun buyers or put their names into a gun registry.  But the FBI refuses to tell us -- or even to tell U.S. Senators -- how (or whether) it is complying with the Smith amendment.  Why in the world should we give the FBI more authority and more names if it abuses the authority it already has?   This is the inherent problem with any background check, where gun buyers’ names are given to a government bureaucrat.  Is there any way to make sure that once a name is entered into a computer, that it doesn’t stay there permanently?   This concern is especially valid, considering how federal agents are already skirting the laws against gun owner registration.  Several dealers around the country have informed GOA that the ATF is increasingly going into gun shops and just xeroxing all of the 4473's, giving them the names of every gun owner who purchased a gun through that shop -- and setting up the basis for a national registration system.    This is illegal under the 1986 McClure-Volkmer law, but that has apparently not stopped it from being done.  If every gun in America has to go through a dealer, this will create a mechanism to compile a list of every gun owner in America.  And, as we have seen with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has just been legislatively handed such a list, when that happens, the talk immediately turns to “confiscation."   THREE:  AS A RESULT, REQUIRING GOVERNMENT APPROVAL OF EVERY GUN OWNER IN AMERICA WOULD DO NOTHING BUT CREATE A PLATFORM FOR NATIONAL GUN REGISTRATION AND CONFISCATION.   As alluded to above, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo now has a comprehensive gun registry.  This is the most dangerous thing that New York legislators could have done -- as Cuomo has made it clear he’s considering gun confiscation of lawfully-owned firearms.   “I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said.  “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option -- keep your gun but permit it.”   How nice.  He’ll let gun owners “permit” their guns for now -- so that, presumably, they can be confiscated later, just as certain defensive weapons were confiscated in New York City during the Mayor David Dinkins administration in 1991.   FOUR:  THE FBI REFUSES TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW GUARANTEEING THE RIGHTS OF LEGITIMATE PURCHASERS   The Brady Law requires that the FBI correct erroneous denials of firearms purchases.  And it requires that it reply, initially, within five days.  According to attorneys familiar with the problem, the FBI NEVER, EVER, EVER complies with the law.  In fact, it increasingly tells aggrieved legitimate purchasers to "sue us" -- at a potential cost of tens of thousands of dollars.   FIVE:  EVEN UNDER CURRENT LAW, THE BRADY SYSTEM HAS BROKEN DOWN REPEATEDLY   Since its inception, the FBI’s computer systems have often gone offline for hours at a time -- sometimes for days.  And when it fails on weekends, it results in the virtual blackout of gun sales at gun shows across the country.    According to gun laws expert Alan Korwin, "With the NICS computer out of commission, the only place you could legally buy a firearm -- in the whole country -- was from a private individual, since all dealers were locked out of business by the FBI’s computer problem."   Of course, now the President wants to eliminate that last bastion of freedom!   Recently, the FBI’s system went down on Black Friday, angering many gun dealers and gun buyers around the country.  “It means we can’t sell no damn guns,” said Rick Lozier, a manager at Van Raymond Outfitters in Maine.  “If we can’t call it in, we can’t sell a gun.  It’s cost us some money.”   The bottom line:  Our goal is to insure that Obama's politicized dog-and-pony show doesn't produce one word of new gun law.  Not a single word.   And the biggest danger right now is universal background checks -- which would create a platform for national registration and confiscation.   We would note that, in addition, Obama is attempting to illegally enact gun control through unlawful and unconstitutional "executive actions."  Click here to read about these.   ACTION:  Click here to contact your senators and congressman.  Urge them to oppose the universal background check because it is a platform for national firearms registration and confiscation. Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will bounce back as undeliverable. Please forward this e-mail to friends and family Gun Owners of America 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102 Springfield, VA 22151 703-321-8585 www.gunowners.org Contact Form If this alert was forwarded to you, you can subscribe to receive alerts directly by clicking here.

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.

EXECUTIVE ORDER PROPOSED FOR OBAMA GUN CONTROL SPEECH CALLED TREASONOUS! AND IT IS!

http://www.inquisitr.com/483439/treason-executive-order-proposed-for-obama-gun-control-speech-called-treasonous/

TIME TO KILL - A SAD COMMENTARY WRITTEN BY AN AMERICAN SOLDIER

http://themadjewess.com/2013/01/15/a-time-to-kill-sad-commentary-written-by-an-american-soldier/

And to make sure you don't even have to click - here it is:

A Time to Kill

Posted on January 12, 2013 by LT

I am a soldier.  I know what war looks like, what it sounds like, smells like, what it feels like in my soul.
I stand today in the twilight of my nation’s grace, looking into the darkness of impending war.
My sleep is troubled, knowing what awaits, yet the ignorant and the ‘true believers’ sleep easily in their delusions, and I am saddened by it.
Daily, I see the Blackhawk and Apache helicopters flying over my city, the military vehicles which appear so frequently now on our roads, often with ‘guns up’ in violation of Posse Comitatus, and I know why they prepare, that it is not far off.
Nightly I hear the report of gunfire near my home, the noise angry men make as they prepare to boil over.  These are not soldiers – they are but angry men.  And though I share their well-justified anger, I am cautious with them, for they are not disciplined, and they know not the face of war, nor the burdens it imposes upon mind, body, and soul.  Because of this, they are dangerous, and I am saddened by this – that dangerous men should roam the streets near my home, full of anger and the lust for vengeance.
All about me are the ceaseless murmurs of soulless politicians and media propagandists, who wear their agendas on their sleeves as a badge of superiority, and the boundless echoes of their contrived ‘message’ assaults me from all sides, even repeated from the mouths of dear friends, and I am saddened by it.
I bear witness to the fact that throughout my lifetime, the lifeblood of my republic has been drained away by greedy and self-serving men, from high to low, who contrive nought but deception against their neighbors and countrymen, and who fail to consider that their children and mine shall share the same fate, the same future, and I am saddened by it.
But I am a soldier, and I know what must be done; and so I shall put away my sadness and I shall harness up the bitter steed of war, and gird myself up for the battle; and I shall ride out to meet the enemies of Liberty; not in rage, not for anger sake or the hope of vengeance; but because I swore an oath before God, to jealously guard our Republic and its Constitution against all enemies; Him I shall not disappoint, for He is my Hope and my Trust.
Therefore, as much as my soul laments against the harsh truth before me, I make this declaration to my enemies who press me into this battle, that none shall be able to afterwards say “I did not know, you did not warn me”;
I do not care why you took that job with the government, or why you continue to hold it.  I only know that you have become Judas and sold yourself to an oppressive state - your government office buildings and vehicles are part of the battlefield, and as a soldier I shall act accordingly.
I do not care why, as a journalist, you choose to spin and corrupt the news, rather than report the plain truth and let the people judge for themselves.  I only know that you have violated the public trust in the most vile and seditious manner, and thus your homes, offices, studios, vehicles, and any other place you may find yourself are part of the battlefield, and as a soldier I shall act accordingly.
I do not care why you signed that union card.  I only know that you pay dues to a communist organization which conducts treasonous works against my Republic daily – and so your union hall and your work-sites are part of the battlefield, and as a soldier I shall act accordingly.
I do not care that you only voted for the traitor because you are elderly/disabled or otherwise dependent upon government largess.  Are you so ignorant and/or disinterested that you could not see through their propaganda, to the fact that your sustenance was assured either way?  What have you gained now that the public housing areas you live in, and the public facilities you depend on are part of the battlefield?  Though I am a soldier, I can afford you little protection, for you have placed yourselves on the battlefield.
I know that all of these places and all of these people are part of the battlefield ,not just because I am a soldier, and have experienced a few battlefields in my day; but also because our President declares that even our own homes are on the battlefield, whether we wish them to be or not, and I have no choice but to believe him; it’s not just that the NDAA passed – a battlefield is not defined by law; it’s the profound build-up of martial power and resources across my once-great nation which tells me a battle is being prepared here.  Over two billion rounds of ammunition procured by DHS and its sub-agencies in the past 18 months, plus machine guns in the tens of thousands, armored vehicles, combat aircraft, drones, and other implements of war being staged throughout our nation, our home – how do you explain that except as the preparation for battle?
I will fight not because I desire it, but because I cannot justify any other course of action – when the enemy attacks, you must fight – you must kill or you will die. 
I smell you, my enemy; I can feel the ambush you have laid for me and my true countrymen, all about like a sticky spider’s web, yet we will not back down, and though you will kill some of us, you will not get us all before we have finished with you.
I stand here, ready, on the eve of battle, and I ask God why I have been brough to the threshold of this battlefield, about to be thrust in, when I though my soldiering days were through; and I am reminded that there is by His decree, a Time to Kill, as well as a Time to Die…  who am I to question why?

 Saddle up, boys, it’s time to ride out and meet them.

For those who are willing, simply comment with the words “I will stand”, that the enemies of Liberty may know what they face, and perhaps relent - it is our duty first to serve peace, even if to do so we must make war.

LT
~Those who abuse Liberty, sentence themselves to Death!

Subscribe to NC Renegade Posts via Email

      

Plugin by: PHP Freelancer

SHOWDOWN AT THE DC CORRAL - SULTAN KNISH

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2013/01/gun-control-shootout-at-dc-corral.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FromNyToIsraelSultanRevealsTheStoriesBehindTheNews+%28from+NY+to+Israel+Sultan+Reveals+The+Stories+Behind+the+News%29

NC GUN MAKER PRODUCING NEW ARAK RIFLE HYBRID IN FACE OF GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/nc-gun-maker-producing-new-arak-rifle-hybrid-in-the-face-of-gun-control-legislation/#.UPSwofL2z5s.twitter

BIDEN'S GUN CONTROL RECOMMENTATIONS: BACKGROUND CHECKS TO BE TOP PRIORITY (HOW COME THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN OF ALL IN THE USA, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, DIDN'T GET ONE? CAN'T WAIT TO SEE HIS MUG SHOT IN THE POST OFFICE.

"I don't want to lose a vote on this," said one progressive gun control advocate. "If we go too soon and we lose a vote then we are fucked."

>>> In other words, it will be a "progressively" incremental loss of the 2nd Amendment

One could say, with all the rapidity with which this has been undertaken, that this may not only be a 'rush to judgment' but it may also be a "rush to Judgment Day''


~J

Joe Biden Gun Control Recommendations: Background Checks To Be Top Priority

Posted: 01/11/2013 4:18 pm EST  |  Updated: 01/11/2013 6:36 pm EST

WASHINGTON -- Just days before Vice President Joe Biden issues a sweeping series of recommendations on gun policy Tuesday, the outline of his suggestions is coming into focus.

Multiple sources close to the talks tell The Huffington Post that the vice president will make universal background checks for ALL gun purchases the "top priority" of his suggestions. The idea has broad support among politicians in the wake of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, as well as backing from some traditionally pro-gun rights voices. The clearest sign that background checks will be the centerpiece of the Biden recommendations, however, is that a number of gun control advocacy groups have also deemed it such, as opposed to focusing their efforts on higher-profile measures, such as those that would limit the types of guns available for purchase.

That said, those measures will also likely end up in Biden's set of recommendations as well, according to an administration official. The White House pushed back Friday morning on reports that it is shying away from including some form of an assault weapons ban in its final legislative push out of concern that it was too heavy a lift through Congress.

"Those reports are false," White House spokesman Matt Lehrich told The Huffington Post Friday. "The president has been clear that Congress should reinstate the assault weapons ban and that avoiding this issue just because it's been politically difficult in the past is not an option."

The question confronting the administration at this juncture concerns process as much as policy. After inviting input from virtually all stakeholders in the gun policy debate, the vice president's team has a general idea of what recommendations it will put forward in its final proposal on Tuesday. Among the other ideas likely to be included are funding for more police officers and first responders, a more comprehensive federal database on gun violence and gun purchases, more direct coordination between state and federal law enforcement officials, a push for better mental health care services and measures to deal with gun violence and pop culture.

But what's uncertain is the best way to get those policy prescriptions into law. Does the White House introduce one comprehensive package in hopes of passing the most thorough response possible to the wave of mass-shooting violence? Does it pare down that package if it runs into opposition on the Hill? Or does it pursue separate votes on individual items so that at least some legislation is passed, with hopes that legislative success begets more legislative success in the future?

The White House declined to address questions about procedural tactics. But on and off the Hill, pro-gun control officials are gravitating toward the latter option.

"I don't want to lose a vote on this," said one progressive gun control advocate. "If we go too soon and we lose a vote then we are fucked."

The most illustrative example of this conundrum involves the literal gun control component of the equation. While the administration will put restrictions on military-style firearms in its recommendations, both the White House and advocates are far more bullish on the prospects of prohibiting high-capacity ammunition magazines.

"I have never quite heard as much talk about the need to do something about high-capacity magazines as I have heard spontaneously from every group I have met with so far," Biden said prior to a stakeholders' meeting on Thursday.

There's reason for such bullishness. Over the past days several Republican lawmakers have said they could, in fact, support action on high-capacity magazines but would oppose any ban on assault weapons.

"I think that’s a whole different issue, that can maybe be dealt with without violating the 2nd Amendment, but I want to see the legislation," Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told the Des Moines Register.

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.), who has a lifetime "A" rating from the NRA, made the same point in a separate interview.

"There are some problems, and maybe these huge magazines even for someone who says, 'look, I just use an AR-15 for target practice,' but do you really need to be standing there shooting at a silhouette a shot a second or even quicker with that kind of weapon? For what purpose?" Gingrey told the Marietta Daily Journal. “I would be willing to listen to the possibility of the capacity of a magazine.”

SANDY HOOK MASSACRE - TIMELINE - BOY! DO I HAVE QUESTIONS!

http://www.prisonplanet.com/sandy-hook-massacre-timeline.html

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ONCE DEFENDED AGENTS PUTTING GUN TO LITTLE GIRL'S HEAD

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/obama-admin-once-defended-agents-putting-gun-to-little-girls-head/

ASSAULT ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT: I WILL NOT COMPLY

Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/alexander/16224/

PDF

Print Friendly

Comment

Donate

Subscribe to Alexander's Essays in The Patriot Post: CLICK HERE.

Patriot Headline Report » For News That Matters Most

The Right Opinion » The Web's Best Columnists

Grassroots Commentary » Strictly Outside the Beltway

Alexander's Column – January 10, 2013

Assault on the Second Amendment

'I Will Not Comply'

"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." --Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

Though tens of millions of American Patriots have already said it, the time has come for one of us to go to the mountaintop and shout it so the whole world can hear it.
I hereby make this declaration: I will NOT comply with any executive decree, law or judicial diktat that violates our innate right to self defense, or the defense of Liberty enshrined in our Constitution and authorized by its Second Amendment.
What does that mean?
It means I will neither register with, nor surrender to the government, any weapon in my possession. I further declare that I am not in possession of any weapon, weapon component or ammunition that has not been lawfully acquired for lawful purposes, including defense of self and family, home and property, and most importantly, defense of Liberty in accordance with the Second Amendment.
I have spoken with my family and our Patriot Team about the potential consequences of this public declaration, both for our families and for our company. They fully understand the implications of my very public declaration of civil disobedience in defense of Liberty and Rule of Law. They understand that I have and will abide, first and foremost, by my oath to support and defend our Constitution -- the very oath that Barack Obama and his NeoCom cadres have solemnly sworn, but stand in abject violation of same.
Since publishing the first issue of The Patriot Post more than 16 years ago, I have made clear that one constitutional prohibition on the central government trumps all others, and that is the proscription against federal infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms."

Post Your Opinion

Indeed, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote, in his eminent "Commentaries on the Constitution," "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
Story was James Madison's appointee to the High Court, and Madison himself wrote in Federalist No. 46, "The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition."
Just after Obama's re-election, I warned that he would attempt to render neutral the only substantive obstacle between Liberty and his avowed political agenda of "fundamentally transforming the United States of America" -- the Second Amendment.
I noted that, per their standard political playbook, the socialists and their Leftmedia promoters would wait on some tragic murder spree, and, in keeping with Obama's game plan to "never let a serious crisis go to waste," use that event as fodder to seize guns.
A month after writing those words, a mentally deranged sociopath used a firearm to kill children and adults in a Connecticut elementary school. Before the bodies of murdered children had even been removed from Sandy Hook Elementary, Obama was, shamefully, stacking their coffins to use as a soapbox for his latest and greatest assault on the Second Amendment -- a renewed effort to not only ban the future sale of many defensive weapons, but register them in order to eventually confiscate them.

Obama has framed this debate as a contest between "public safety" and the NRA, and insists that the Second Amendment is to protect hunting and sport shooting.
Obama claims, "We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting..." If by "hunting" he means hunting down those who offend Liberty, then he is correct.

Post Your Opinion

Some Leftist governors and legislators have already adopted Obama's "hunting" misinformation memo. New York's Andrew Cuomo proposed "the toughest assault weapons ban in the nation" this week, asserting, "We respect hunters and sportsmen. This is not taking away peoples' guns. I own a gun. I own a Remington shotgun. I've hunted. I've shot. That's not what this is about. It's about ending the unnecessary risk of high-capacity assault rifles. No one hunts with an assault rifle! No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer!"
If, by "risk of high-capacity assault rifles," he means risk that they might be used for their intended purpose -- to defend Liberty against the tyranny of socialist politicos and those who do their bidding -- then I understand his concern.
The fact is, these weapons, which Obama and his cadres want to eradicate, account for only a tiny fraction of homicides in the U.S.
According to the FBI's public safety statistics, almost 10 times as many people are murdered annually with knives, hammers and bare hands than are murdered with the type of weapon used in the Connecticut attack. Furthermore, from the time the Senate first banned so-called "assault weapons" in 1994, through the expiration of that ban in 2004 and to the present day, the number of such weapons held by the people has increased by 2.5 million, while murders have dropped by almost 50 percent. In other words, more guns equate to less crime. But Obama is not one to let hard facts interfere with his sacred socialist agenda.
So, why all the focus on so-called "assault weapons" -- what is the Left's real agenda? (That question was rhetorical.)
(Note: I write "so-called assault weapons" because these arms are purchased not for "assault" but rather for defense. Perhaps we should call the current assault on the Second Amendment the "defensive weapons ban.")
Patriots, this contest is most assuredly not between public safety and the NRA, but between Leftists and Essential Liberty.

Benjamin Franklin spoke timeless words to this contest: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." In the case of those who would give up Essential Liberty for nothing more than the perception of a little temporary safety with more gun prohibitions, they will, ultimately, lose both.

Post Your Opinion

In addition to Sen. Dianne Feinstein's renewed "comprehensive" ban on a long list of defensive weapons, which she plans to reintroduce in two weeks, Obama appointed Joe Biden to be his executive branch lightning rod for this subterfuge.
Three weeks ago, Attorney General Eric Holder implied that Obama might use an executive order to undermine the Second Amendment. This week, Joe Biden confirmed that, saying, "The president is going to act. There are executive orders, there's executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet. But we're compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required. It's critically important that we act."
On that note, enough is enough.
Liberty is "endowed by our Creator," not determined by executive decree or congressional legislation or judicial diktat. Liberty is an innate human right. It is a gift from God, not from politicians.
I have, herein, publicly declared that I will not comply with any decree, law or diktat, which violates our Constitution, or the innate right to defend Liberty. I know that there are tens of millions of Patriots who are, likewise, committed. As our Founders affirmed in the last line of the document codifying their rejection of tyranny: "For the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor."
We will see what happens to a citizen who very publicly dares to challenge Obama's most coveted socialist agenda.
Patriots, I am not asking you to make the same public declaration that I have made, but I am asking you to join me in a pledge to defend Liberty by affirming your commitment to support and defend our Constitution and the Second Amendment against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Please make that affirmation today -- click here -- and encourage others to do the same.
Pro Deo et Constitutione — Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis

Mark Alexander
Publisher, The Patriot Post

(To submit reader comments click here.)

Patriot Headline Report » For News That Matters Most

The Right Opinion » The Web's Best Columnists

Grassroots Commentary » Strictly Outside the Beltway

(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)

---

GUN CONTRO'S NAZI CONNECTION. A DICTATOR AND DEATH. ARE YOU WILLING TO BE DISARMED, AMERICA?

"Gun Control’s" Nazi Connection

Startling evidence suggests that the Gun Control Act of 1968
was lifted, almost in its entirety, from Nazi legislation.

Reference the English translation (plus a link to the original (copy) in German.)

Click here to Purchase the Book, "Gun Control" Gateway to Tyranny

Click here to Purchase the Book, "Gun Control" Gateway to Tyranny

Original article appeared in Guns and Ammo Magazine May 1993

Are you tired of being told that "gun control" is a chronic pain that you have to accept because there's no cure? Do you -- a law abiding person -- want to be free: to own whichever firearms you want to own, regardless of where in America you live; from waiting periods, gun bans, magazine capacity restrictions, etc.; to spend your time on the range or in the field, rather than fighting "gun control"?
Are you tired of giving hard earned bucks to efforts that have at best only slowed the gun grabbers' push toward firearms registration and confiscation? If you have had enough of death by a thousand cuts, you are ready to take action to wipe out "gun control" -- now.
Members of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) consider "gun control" to be an aggressive cancer. JPFO has a cure, a way to destroy "gun control". JPFO has hard evidence that shows that the Nazi Weapons Law (March 18, 1938) is the source of the U.S Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA ’68). Adolph Hitler signed the Nazi Weapons Law. The Gestapo (Nazi National Secret Police) enforced it. In "Gun Control": Gateway to Tyranny we present the official German text of the Nazi Weapons Law and a side-by-side translation into English. Even more deadly: a side-by-side, section-by-section comparison of the GCA ’68 with the Nazi Weapons Law. If you have this in your hands, no one can tell you that you're imagining things.
The clincher: JPFO knows who implanted into American law cancerous ideas from the Nazi Weapons Law.
The likely culprit is a former senator, now deceased. We have documentary proof -- see below -- that he had the original text of the Nazi Weapons Law in his possession 4 months before the bill that became GCA ’68 was signed into law.
This former senator was a senior member of the U.S. team that helped to prosecute Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg, Germany, in 1945-46. That is probably where he found out about the Nazi Weapons Law. He may have gotten a copy of it then, or at a later date. We cannot imagine why any U.S. lawmaker would own original texts of Nazi laws. To find out his name, read on.
With this hard evidence in your hands and in your head, you can destroy cancerous "gun control". You can challenge anyone who backs "gun control". You can show them the Nazi ideas, line by line.
The parallels between the Nazi law and GCA ’68 will leap at you from the page. For example, law abiding firearm owners in Illinois, Massachusetts and New Jersey must carry identification cards based on formats from the Nazi Weapons Law. Nazi based laws have no place in America. Thousands of Americans died or were wounded in the war to wipe out the Nazis. They did not suffer or die so that Hitler's ideas could live on in America and kill more Americans. Remember Killeen, Texas! The 23 who died in Luby's Cafeteria there died because they obeyed Nazi inspired "gun control" laws. The law forced them, unarmed, to face an armed madman.
To destroy "gun control" before more law abiding Americans are murdered by criminals or madmen helped by "gun control", you need to get hold of the evidence as presented in "Gun Control": Gateway to Tyranny. You can then challenge the media, the most aggressive backers of "gun control". Ask media personalities in your city or town why they back Nazi based laws. You can help to erase "gun control", Hitler's last legacy.
GCA ’68 puts your life at risk right now. You have a constitutional civil right to be armed in order to protect yourself, because under U.S law the police have no duty to protect the average person:

"There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state (or Federal) against being murdered by criminals or madmen. It is monstrous if the state fails to protect its residents against such predators but it does not violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, or, we suppose, any other provision of the Constitution. The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: it tells the state (gov't) to let people alone; it does not require the federal government or the state to provide services, even so elementary a service as maintaining law and order"

(Bowers v. DeVito, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 686F.2d 616 [1982]).

The Supreme Court last dealt with this issue in 1856; the 1982 decision states the position in modern language. The laws of virtually every state parallel federal law (see JPFO Special Report Dial 911 and Die! covered in Guns & Ammo, July 1992). This has been so ever since the Constitution was adopted in 1791. As a result, the framers of the Second Amendment deliberately created (guaranteed) an individual civil right to be armed. It is your only reliable defense against criminals. GCA ’68 ties your hands and keeps you from carrying out your legal duty to ensure your own self defense. GCA ’68 thus undermines a pillar of U.S. law and helps criminals to kill law abiding Americans. Hitler would be pleased.
Thus, GCA ’68 marked a new approach to "gun control". It replaced the Federal Firearms Act (June 30, 1938), which was based on the federal power to regulate interstate commerce. The 1938 law required firearms dealers to get a federal license (which then cost $1). Only dealers could ship firearms across state lines. Ordinary people could receive shipments from dealers.
In GCA ’68 the government required that in almost all cases only dealers could send and receive firearms across state lines. This ended "mail order" sales of firearms by law abiding persons who are not licensed dealers. GCA ’68 hits you even harder. Congress gave federal bureaucrats in Washington D.C., the power to decide what kinds of firearms you can own. The framers of GCA ’68 borrowed an idea -- that certain firearms are "hunting weapons" -- from the Nazi Weapons Law (Section 21 and Section 32 of the Regulations, page 61 and page 73, respectively, of "Gun Control": Gateway to Tyranny). The equivalent U.S. term, "sporting purpose," was used to classify firearms. But it was not defined anywhere in GCA ’68. Thus, bureaucrats were empowered to ban whole classes of firearms. They have, in fact, done so.
We wanted to know the source of these new ideas. On reading "Dial 911 and Die!" a JPFO member told us he had seen an article -- by Alan Stang in 'Review of the News,' October 4, 1967 (pages 15-20) -- the author of which felt that the Nazi Weapons Law was the model for GCA ’68. We found the article. But Stang did not reproduce the Nazi law, so we could not check his conclusions.
We started to hunt for the text of the Nazi Weapons Law. We eventually found it, in the law library of an Ivy League university.
Until 1943-44, the German government published its laws and regulations in the 'Reichsgesetzblatt,' roughly the equivalent of the U.S. Federal Register. Carefully shelved by law librarians, the 1938 issues of this German government publication had gathered a lot of dust. In the 'Reichsgesetzblatt' issue for the week of March 21, 1938, was the official text of the Weapons Law (March 18, 1938). It gave Hitler's Nazi party a stranglehold on the Germans, many of whom did not support the Nazis. We found that the Nazis did not invent "gun control" in Germany. The Nazis inherited gun control and then perfected it: they invented handgun control.
The Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 replaced a Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April 13, 1928. The 1928 law was enacted by a center-right, freely elected German government that wanted to curb "gang activity," violent street fights between Nazi party and Communist party thugs. All firearm owners and their firearms had to be registered. Sound familiar? "Gun control" did not save democracy in Germany. It helped to make sure that the toughest criminals, the Nazis, prevailed.
The Nazis inherited lists of firearm owners and their firearms when they 'lawfully' took over in March 1933. The Nazis used these inherited registration lists to seize privately held firearms from persons who were not "reliable." Knowing exactly who owned which firearms, the Nazis had only to revoke the annual ownership permits or decline to renew them.
In 1938, five years after taking power, the Nazis enhanced the 1928 law. The Nazi Weapons Law introduced handgun control. Firearms ownership was restricted to Nazi party members and other "reliable" people.
The 1938 Nazi law barred Jews from businesses involving firearms. On November 10. 1938 -- one day after the Nazi party terror squads (the SS) savaged thousands of Jews, synagogues and Jewish businesses throughout Germany -- new regulations under the Weapons Law specifically barred Jews from owning any weapons, even clubs or knives.
Given the parallels between the Nazi Weapons Law and the GCA ’68, we concluded that the framers of the GCA ’68 -- lacking any basis in American law to sharply cut back the civil rights of law abiding Americans -- drew on the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938.
Finding the Nazi Weapons Law whetted our appetite. We wanted to know who implanted this Nazi cancer in America. We began by probing the backgrounds of lawmakers who championed "gun control". We focused on those whose bills became part of GCA ’68. GCA ’68 as enacted closely tracks proposals dating to August 1963. We felt that if the culprit were a lawmaker -- or a congressional staffer -- he or she would know Germany, German law and possibly even speak German. He or she probably would have spent time in Germany on business or during military service. Alternatively, if the culprit were not a member of Congress or a staffer, there would be testimony at the hearings to that effect.
Most potential suspects were quickly eliminated; they had no apparent ties to Germany. But one lawmaker caught our attention.
An old "Who's Who" entry showed he had been a senior member of the U.S. team that prosecuted German war criminals at Nuremberg in 1945-46. Thus, he had lived in Germany just after the Nazi period. His official duties required him to look at Nazi records, including Nazi laws. In 1963 he led the effort to greatly expand the Federal Firearms Act of 1938.
We then got a break. We told a legal scholar of our findings. He was intrigued. He sent us an extract from the record of hearings held a few months prior to the enactment of GCA ’68. At the end of June 1968, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee to investigate Juvenile Delinquency -- chaired by Thomas J. Dodd (D-CT) -- held hearings on bills: (1) "To Require the Registration of Firearms" (S.3604). (2) "To Disarm Lawless Persons" (S.3634) and (3) "To Provide for the Establishment of a National Firearms Registry" (S.3637), among others.
U.S. Representative John Dingell (D-MI) testified at these Senate hearings on "gun control". Senator Joseph D. Tydings (D-MD) chaired some of these hearings, in Dodd's absence.
Rep. Dingell expressed concern that if firearms registration were required, it might lead to confiscation of firearms, as had happened in Nazi Germany. Tydings angrily accused Rep. Dingell of using "scare tactics":
"Are you inferring that our system here, gun registration or licensing, would in any way be comparable to the Nazi regime in Germany, where they had a secret police, and a complete takeover?"
Rep. Dingell backed away.
(Hearings before the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, 90th Congress, 2nd Session, June 26, 27 and 28 and July 8, 9 and 10. 1968, pp. 479-80, 505-6 cited as Subcommittee Hearings.)
Tydings later inserted into the hearing record various documents, "concerning the history of Nazism and gun confiscation."
Exhibit No. 62 (see reproduction) is fascinating. This letter -- dated July 12, 1968 -- is to Subcommittee Chairman Dodd from Lewis C. Coffin, Law Librarian at the Library of Congress. Coffin wrote:

" ... we are enclosing herewith a translation of the Law on Weapons of March 18, 1938, prepared by Dr. William Solyom-Fekete of [the European Law Division -- ed.] as well as the Xerox of the original German text which you supplied" (Subcommittee Hearings, p. 489, emphasis added).

This letter makes it public knowledge that at the end of June 1968 -- 4 months before GCA ’68 was enacted -- Senator Thomas J. Dodd, now deceased, personally owned a copy of the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law.
Why did Dodd own the original German text of any Nazi law? Why did he make known that he owned it?
The Library of Congress then had (and still has) the ’Reichsgesetzblatt’ in its collection. The Library of Congress translator, Dr. Solyom-Fekete, could easily have used the Library of Congress’ own copy.
Any member of Congress who wanted to read the Nazi Weapons Law need only have asked for it to be produced from the shelves of the Library of Congress and for it to be translated by Library of Congress experts. Why should any member of Congress ever have owned the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law?
Without access to Tom Dodd's personal papers, archived under his heirs’ control, we unfortunately cannot offer definite answers.
Dodd could have acquired the German text of the Nazi Weapons Law during his time at Nuremberg. But he had no need to do so.
Dodd did not personally handle the prosecution of Nazi Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick, who signed the Nazi Weapons Law. The case against Frick was presented by Robert M.W. Kempner, Assistant Trial Counsel for the United States (see ’Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal,’ cited as TMWC, Vol. V, pp. 352-67, Nuremberg, Germany, 1947).
Nor should the Nazi Weapons Law otherwise have come to Dodd's attention. The Nazi Weapons Law was not used as evidence against Frick (see Kempner's speech, TMWC, V, pp. 352-67 and 'Index of Laws, Decrees, Orders, Directives, and the Administration of Justice in Nazi Germany and Nazi Dominated Countries', TMWC, Vol. XXIII, pp. 430-33). The Nazi Weapons Law is not listed among documents submitted as evidence to the Tribunal by the American prosecutors (see Vol. XXIV, pp. 98-169).
The prosecutors at Nuremberg doubtless knew of the Nazi Weapons Law. They probably saw it in the ’Reichsgesetzblatt.’ On the same day that Nazi Interior Minister Frick signed the Weapons Law, March 18, 1938, he signed another law governing security measures in newly annexed Austria. This law concerning Austria appeared in the 'Reichsgesetzblatt' -- directly in front of the Weapons Law -- and was introduced into evidence at Nuremberg (’Reichsgesetzblatt’ 1938, I, p. 262; the Nazi Weapons Law was published in the same volume, p. 265; see TMWC, Vol. V, p.358 for reference to law concerning Austria).
Thus, the Nazi Weapons Law appeared to have no historical merit at Nuremberg and should not have attracted anyone’s notice, certainly not to the extent of causing anyone to want to keep a copy of it as a separate document.
If Dodd got his copy of the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law during his time at Nuremberg, it likely was part of a collection of documents, for example, issues of the ’Reichsgesetzblatt’.
But if he acquired the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law after his service at Nuremberg, he must have done so for a very specific reason. The Nazi Weapons Law plainly did not figure at Nuremberg.
We may safely conclude it had little, if any, interest for those interested in the history of the Nazis’ rise to power. For example, the Nazi Weapons Law is not mentioned at all in William L. Shirer’s very thorough study of Nazi Germany, ’The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich’ (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1950).
At the hearings held by Dodd’s subcommittee at the end of June 1968, Rep. Dingell had objected to the firearms registration provision then being discussed. Dodd may have offered his copy of the Nazi Weapons Law to show that the specific proposal did not resemble anything in the Nazi law.
He may not have realized that he was revealing a broader truth; that the whole fabric of GCA ’68 was based on the Nazi Weapons Law, even if the specific registration proposal was not so based.
Alternatively, Dodd may not have cared whether or not anyone knew that he had the German text of the Nazi Weapons Law. He doubtless knew that months would pass before the hearing record was printed and so generally available for scrutiny. Thus, even if anyone then noticed the parallels between the two laws, the bill would already have become law.
Rep. Dingell does not appear to have pursued the matter: the firearms registration provision was not included in GCA ’68. The Congress was stampeded on "gun control" by public enthusiasm. Martin Luther King had been murdered on April 4, 1968, and Robert F. Kennedy had been murdered on June 6, 1968.
We are not the first to have seen this hearing record. But we appear to be the first to have recognized its importance. This hearing record suggests strongly that the late Senator Thomas J. Dodd (D-CT) himself implanted the Nazi Weapons Law into American law, or, at very least, helped others to do so.
Now you know the ugly truth about the roots of GCA ’68. But you need to see -- with your own eyes -- the hard evidence of the Nazi roots of "gun control" in America presented in "Gun Control": Gateway to Tyranny.
If you want to destroy "gun control", you can use this book to do it.
The Nazi Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, cleared the way for World War II and Nazi genocide against the Jews, Gypsies and 7,000,000 other people.

The 1938 Nazi Weapons Law that disarmed, enslaved & murdered the men above, is alive and well in the United States, and is called, "The Gun Control act of 1968", and is enforced by the modern day Gestapo, known as the "Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE)."

Watch "2A Today for The USA"
New - view The Auschwitz Album. Plus — " Islam's Armenian Genocide - Template for the Holocaust"
Use our latest 2A Today handbills - make copies and hand out to all your contacts.
Remember to check out all JPFO's movies
JPFO Membership form
JPFO On line secure membership sign up

YOU GOT A LIBERAL JEWISH FRIEND? SIGN HIM UP ON THE BLOG BELOW

http://themadjewess.com/2013/01/08/message-to-liberal-jews-gun-control-made-the-holocaust-possible/?like=1&source=post_flair&_wpnonce=8def401c6b