Weekly Post – Page 24

The First Amendment

As we see a plethora of new anti-gun legislation being introduced in California, across the country, and in our nation’s capitol, I thought it might be a good time to remind ourselves of what our 2nd Amendment rights protect.

Like the vast majority of this country’s citizens, I am descendant from immigrants. The matriarch of our family made the difficult decision to leave her home and come to the United States many, many years ago. As an outspoken young woman, something uncommon in the era, she faced a dilemma. In her home country, she was relatively safe walking the streets, as the Crown’s punishment for crimes was extraordinarily severe and exceedingly cruel. At the same time, she was unable to voice any opposition or criticism against the rulers for fear of suffering the same fate, a fate her family would never be able to question. She chose to immigrate to the United States realizing that she would not be as well protected by the State, but at the same time would have freedom of speech, among many others.

The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights are unique in the world. The protections it guarantees have never been duplicated. Our founders set down these principles as the basis for everything that followed and they are reflective of the struggle they faced leading to the formation of this country.

The First Amendment reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

These freedoms are not easy. The First Amendment means we as citizens must embrace and defend these very rights for those we do not agree with. It means others will be able to speak positions opposite to our own and even in disapproval of the very rights that allow them to voice the opinion in the first place. It means our country will be made up of people who exercise all faiths and reported on by a press unencumbered by government censorship. It means being able to associate with people of our own choosing and being able to petition our Government with complaints.

What is the cost? The cost is a less controlling government and more tolerant country. It means we will not live in a police state where our thoughts, our words, our faith, our actions are controlled in order to make us ‘safer’.

This is where the Second Amendment comes in. The right of the “people” to bear arms is what protects the First Amendment and the entire Constitution. It not only allows us to defend our nation and ourselves from others who would do us harm in a free society, but it ensures our government will abide by it’s own promises. Without it, there is no freedom.

We bear the responsibility of our First Amendment rights every day. Some say the Second Amendment is outdated or only refers to muskets or hunting. We disagree, but if we are defenders of the Constitution, we must also defend their freedom of speech and their ability to petition the government for redress. The ultimate measure of the decision on their grievances is of course the Constitution itself and it is in that we must believe.

As citizens of the United States, we enjoy freedoms found no place else in the world. It is an honor to live in this society, as well as a burden – one we are very grateful to have. But these freedoms come at a cost. It means we are responsible to live up to the principles our founders established and defend them – all of them – with all of the rights our founders fought and gave their lives to hand down to us.

Bob

#oddstuffing ‪#‎1stamendment‬, ‪#‎2ndamendment‬, ‪#‎constitution‬, ‪#‎freedom‬

Trust

The simple definition courtesy of Merriam-Webster: belief that someone or something is reliable, good, honest, effective, etc.

Trust is an important concept for all beings, but especially in humans. Trust allows us to proceed with confidence that what we see, what we are told, the relationship we share with another is based on truth and honesty. Being suspicious creatures at heart, trust is earned over time and through evidence of good deeds or intentions. But for as long as it takes to develop trust, it can be destroyed instantly through lies, deceit or collusion.

The trust we place in the people around us is the foundation of a civilization. We trust the officials we have given the authority to govern and regulate our society will do so not in their own best interest, but in ours. We trust they will respect the laws of land and of humanity in general. We trust them with our safety, security and our very lives.

This year more than any, our trust as United States citizens is being tested. We are being told that changes need to be made for our own good, in our best interest – not for the benefit of a select few. We’re being told that the majority of us actually support these changes and we should as well.

At a time in our nation’s history when firearm ownership is at an all time high and violent crime is at historic lows, and continuing to trend downwards, we are told we have a gun violence crisis. This ‘crisis’, the narrative goes, can only be solved through new and severe restrictions of our rights to own firearms. We are told the authority exists to make these news laws without our consent.

We are told the only way to prevent criminals from using guns illegally is to prevent the law abiding from having them. We are told we do not need the best and most effective means of protecting our lives and our families. We are told we can only have a certain, limited set of non-intimidating firearms. We are told we cannot have enough ammunition to practice and prepare for our personal defense. We are told we can only have these if we pay new fees, new taxes and subject ourselves to constant and intense scrutiny by our government. We are told we cannot be trusted to safely defend ourselves. And of course, we are told nobody wants to take the firearms we already have.

We are not being told the truth.

We look at what is going on in our communities and around the country, and we see the attacks on our Second Amendment rights ourselves. We see politicians and the elite, surrounded by the very firearms they say we should not be able to own. We see states, counties and municipalities imposing more and more restrictive firearms and ammunition laws. Laws which will never prevent criminals from obtaining firearms or committing acts of violence. Laws which only burden the law abiding citizen – turning them in to criminals overnight with the stroke of a pen for daring to defend themselves.

We can see the truth.

This is a very important year for the Second Amendment and for our country. At the heart of it, is who do we as citizens trust. Do we trust in the foundations of our nation, do we trust in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Do we trust in ourselves to be able to make the right choices for our families and ourselves?

Who do you trust?

Bob

#oddstuffing, #trust, #2ndamendment #constitution

We The People

I’ve chosen to start the New Year with the Preamble of the United States Constitution. The full text is:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I bring this up for two reasons. First, I want this to be a reminder of the founding principles of our nation. These radical and downright revolutionary ideas at the time were what our founders created to lead this new country into the future and serve as the basis for all that would follow. Second, with this in mind, 2016 will likely see some of the most serious attacks on US citizens individual and collective rights witnessed in modern times.

At the national level we’ve already seen a taste of what is to come:

• Our President threatening to circumvent congress and legislate through executive orders by requiring NICS background checks utilize the non-due process No Fly List for firearms purchases, mandating universal background checks and firearms registration, reclassifying individual sellers as firearms dealers and banning certain types of ammunition.
• A new and expanded version of the ‘Assault Weapons’ ban.
• Presidential candidates jockeying to see who can come up with the most restrictive gun control scheme including Australian-style gun buyback/confiscations and ‘Assault Weapons’ bans.

On the state level, we’ve seen:

• New York’s ammunition proposal to limit individual purchases to two (2) times the maximum capacity & caliber of their registered firearms every 90 days.
• Connecticut’s Governor’s Executive Order to run state firearm purchases through the No Fly List.
• California’s Lt Governor’s 2018 Gubernatorial campaign/ 2016 Ballot Initiative to require permits and point-of-sale background checks for in-state only ammunition purchases and outlawing all pre-ban standard capacity magazines.

On the local level, we’ve seen:

• Highland Park, Illinois banning so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ and standard capacity magazines.
• Various municipalities outlawing all pre-ban standard capacity magazines, bans of self-defense ammo, mandatory in-home storage laws and zoning firearms and ammunition retailers out of existence.

What’s worse, the list above is just the starting point. Inspired by recent case rejections from the US Supreme Court; states, counties and municipalities around the country are emboldened to push their own restrictive agendas. Will any of these measures do anything to prevent violence? No, of course not. All they do is further erode honest, law abiding citizen rights and their ability to protect themselves and their families from those who don’t obey the law in the first place.

Does it have to be this way? NO! But it’s going to take a concerted effort by ALL responsible firearms owners to stop it. It’s going to take everyone’s voices and votes.

If you’ve never been involved before, 2016 will be the year to be heard. It is understandable to want to stay below the radar and not get on someone’s list, especially for those of us in a restrictive and downright vindictive state like California. Well, I’ve got some bad news for you. If you own a firearm, you’re already on the list – and that legal ownership you enjoy today may not last for long.

If you haven’t joined the NRA or your state affiliate organization, now is the time. If you haven’t donated to the organizations fighting to stop these new constitutional infringements, now is the time. If you haven’t written to your representatives at the local, state and federal level to tell them these attacks on our Constitutional rights is unacceptable, now is the time.

2015 saw record numbers of citizens around the country exercising their Second Amendment rights and purchasing firearms, many of them for the very first time. Imagine the power of that many people saying NO to new gun control laws in their communities, in their states and in the nation. Imagine the power of We The People.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #wethepeople‬ ‪#‎2ndamendment‬ #2016

Why Do You Train?

A whole lot of people are buying firearms right now, many of them for the first time. Nationwide, 2015 is on course to be a record year in the U.S. as estimated by background checks through the NICS system. California already exceeded its busiest firearms buying year. Much of this current rush has been brought about by criminal attacks around the country as well as local, state and federal governments all demanding new draconian gun control laws. Sadly, all of these new proposed laws would have done nothing to prevent the tragedies we’ve seen unfold, but instead are designed to punish the law abiding and make it harder for them to defend themselves.

While I am deeply saddened by why it is happening, what is occurring is encouraging. More and more people are taking charge of their own safely by purchasing firearms for self-defense. But having a firearm for protection doesn’t stop there. Buying the tool is only the first step. Training in the proper use, care and legal aspects of the firearm is the responsible thing to do.

I hesitate to say firearms training should be made compulsory, as a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment shouldn’t be conditional. Imagine if you had to take public speaking classes in order to exercise your First Amendment rights. It would also begin a slippery slope of progressively difficult hurdles to ownership. If a mandated four-hour firearms class is a good idea, then eight hours would probably be better, and 16 hours would be even better than that, and so on and so on. Very quickly you would price the ‘privilege’ of owning a firearm out of the hands of many in the community. That’s not much of a right. However I do feel getting training is the correct thing to do. Used properly, a firearm can save your life. Used improperly it can take it. It’s really that simple.

Owners who are new to firearms should be seeking out the training as part of the purchase. In an ideal world, your firearm’s manufacturer and local dealer would help facilitate or even include it with the purchase. Standard training would include the Four Basic Rules of Firearm Safety, basic usage and marksmanship, care of firearm and the law. These things apply to everyone, everywhere. Beyond this, training depends on your intended use.

Training is important. We train to acquire new skills, maintain or improve existing ones and to prepare us for the time when we need to use our skills in real life. There really is no shortcut; training takes time, commitment, resources and the proper mindset to develop the mental and physical proficiencies. Trained skills are also perishable. Just because you could do something years ago doesn’t mean you can do it at the same level today.

Finding a good instructor and training environment is critical. Specifically when it comes to self-defense training, you need an instructor who will provide a realistic, challenging and safe program. Here are a few things you should look for:

• Do the instructors have applicable and current certifications?
• Do the instructors have a relevant background and experience to teach this type of training?
• Do the instructors carry the proper insurance?
• Do the instructors continue to participate in student and instructor level training themselves?
• Can the instructors provide student references?
• Are the instructors willing to discuss their program and your needs with you?

Then there’s this little concept called ‘the fundamentals’. There’s a tendency for those who take advanced level classes to dismiss basic / fundamental level training as being below them. That couldn’t be further from the truth. All those higher-level skills are built on a solid foundation of the basics. You are never too high-speed to practice at that level.

Firearm ownership and use is a right, but it is your responsibility to use it properly. Good training and practice, practice, practice will help you achieve your goals.

For me, I train to protect myself. I train to protect my family. I train so that I can train others. Why do you train?

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #training‬, ‪#‎2A‬, ‪#‎rights‬, ‪#‎responsibility‬, ‪#‎safety‬

Think About The Children!

No gun control argument is complete until someone cries out, “Think about the children!” It is supposed to be the trump card for which there can be no argument. It’s as if the Founding Fathers crafting the Constitution and Bill of Rights didn’t take into consideration their own children or the generations of children to follow. Or maybe they believe today’s gun owners simply hate kids. I’m going to say no.

Yes, I’m a bit older. I grew up in a time when children where allowed to have and use firearms. You were taught firearms safety in school, by your parents, grandparents or extended family and you were taught to respect them. While I didn’t grow up in a school that had a shooting club or marksmanship classes, there were others that did. Students regularly hunted before school and on the way home during hunting season. Talking about guns, going out and shooting guns, hunting and fishing, it was all okay. If you saw someone walking down the road with a rifle slung over their shoulder, there was no need to call the police.

Fast forward to today. A child in school mentioning a gun in any way, shape or form, drawing a picture of a gun, pointing a finger like a gun, or even eating a pop tart into a shape that someone thinks remotely looks like a gun gets the school locked down, a massive police response and earns the child a suspension or expulsion. How did we get to this point?

Here’s a hint. Former United States Attorney General Eric Holder, at the time the U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C. made the following statement in 1995:

“We just have to be repetitive about this. It’s not enough to have a catchy ad on a Monday and then only do it every Monday. We have to do this every day of the week and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

Having earned his JD at Columbia Law School, Holder is no doubt aware of what brainwashing is. For the rest of us, here is a reminder:

“A method for systematically changing attitudes or altering beliefs, originated in totalitarian countries, especially through the use of torture, drugs, or psychological-stress techniques.”

We seem to have traded the three R’s – reading, writing and arithmetic – for the indoctrination of values based on a politically motivated agenda. Perhaps our students would have a better future if our elementary and high school teachers weren’t cross-trained in psychological operations.

Children and firearms do not have to be a bad thing. One of the greatest pleasures I had while working in a gun shop was seeing parents come in with their young children. Of course they would want to see items in the store and the parents would allow them, but not until they correctly recited the four basic firearms safety rules. Then, and only then, they would hand them the firearm and closely supervise them. These kids, some not even big enough to look over the display counters, would then demonstrate the safest handling, muzzle and trigger finger discipline I’ve ever seen in my life.

Children can be taught to use firearms safely and to respect them, as well as the laws surrounding their use – even in today’s society. But I’m going to take it one step further. I’m going to say ALL children should be given the opportunity (note: not mandatory) to know about firearms. Why? Quite simply because we as parents cannot be with them all the time. It will be up to them to decide what to do if they should come across a firearm at some point in their life. If the only information they have received on the topic is from television and movies, it’s probably not going to end well.

I am very strong proponent of Project ChildSafe, a nonprofit charitable organization committed to promoting firearms safety and making communities safer. Even for families strongly opposed to firearms, I encourage them to visit the Project ChildSafe website and view the video on Have a Conversation with Kids about Firearm Safety at www.projectchildsafe.org to help their family stay safe.

Allowing our schools to teach children that firearms in any way, shape or form are bad – is wrong. Punishing them for celebrating their family’s traditions and their country’s heritage – is wrong. Brainwashing them into believing a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment is unacceptable in today’s society – is wrong.

So yes, let’s think about the children and not let political agenda determine their future.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #thinkaboutthechildren‬, ‪#‎secondamendment‬, ‪#‎2a‬, ‪#‎projectchildsafe‬

No More Mr. Nice Guy

Last week, the United States Supreme Court refused to hear Second Amendment case Friedman v. City of Highland Park from the 7th Circuit Court. This case has serious implications for all US citizens, but in particular, us here in California.

The City of Highland Park was one of 20 Chicago area suburbs that, in the wake of the Heller and McDonald decisions, chose to enact ordinances banning “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines.

As part of the logic used in upholding the law from the 7th Circuit stated, “If a ban on semiautomatic guns and large-capacity magazines reduces the perceived risk from a mass shooting, and makes the public feel safer as a result, that’s a substantial benefit.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia dissented, saying that lower courts have been ignoring Supreme Court precedents on Second Amendment rights. Still, it is highly unlikely the Court will agree to hear another Second Amendment case until there is substantial disagreement between the Circuit Courts.

Two weeks ago San Bernardino, California experienced a brutal and senseless terrorist attack. Within hours, and without any of the facts of the event, our President and other elected officials immediately called for more gun control. Universal background checks, restricting firearms sales to those on the Terror Watchlist and keeping “weapons of war” off our streets. None of which would have done anything to prevent what happened in San Bernardino.

Fueled by massive media coverage, inflammatory and misleading proclamations incited even more fear. The firearms had been “modified to make them more powerful”, they were “high powered rifles”, “weapons of war, barely modified”, “powerful assault weapons” and the shooters had “amassed an arsenal”. Add in a news report that a bullet button turns a semi-automatic rifle into a fully automatic one, and you’ve created a fable that almost begs for more government regulations.

California considers itself the gold standard of gun control in the nation, a model for everyone else to copy. This attack in our own backyard is a slap in the face to California politicians as it proves their gun control laws mean nothing to someone who is already breaking the law.

In 2013, California Senate Bill 374 was vetoed by the Governor. This Bill intended to classify all semiautomatic center-fire rifles that do not have a fixed magazine, including those with bullet buttons, with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds as an assault weapon and require registration. Like currently registered assault weapons, these firearms would be banned from being sold or transferred in California.

Here is where Friedman v. City of Highland Park comes into play. This law is not a registration of currently possessed firearms and a restriction of new sales; it is an outright ban. All current, legally owned firearms meeting the criteria must now be removed from the City.

The timing of this Supreme Court denial could not be worse. Coming just five days after the San Bernardino terrorist attack when anti-gun politicians were falling over each other to be the first to come up with something, anything, to appear stronger on gun control.

Emboldened by the success of Highland Park, California will no doubt copy and push it’s own version even further. Gone will be the registration scheme to be replaced by an outright ban. Currently registered California “Assault Weapons” will most certainly be targeted for an outright ban as well.

When – not if, but when – the new and expanded version of SB-374 is brought up in early 2016, we cannot count on a second Gubernatorial veto. In other words, No More Mr. Nice Guy.

Now is the time to get involved.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #2ndAmendment‬, ‪#‎guncontrol‬, ‪#‎highlandpark‬, ‪#‎california‬, ‪#‎nomoremrniceguy‬ ‪#‎alicecooper‬

A World Without Guns

In the wake of tragedy in our nation and around the world, the rhetoric for more gun control and the erosion of our national gun rights is immediately called out. It begins within hours of the first shots being fired, as the victims still lay bleeding and long before the who, why and how have been answered. They demand to keep the dangerous weapons of war of out the people’s hands, even if what is being proposed would not have prevented the most recent tragedy they reference. While the proponents feign a respect for the Second Amendment, the goal is always clear, to restrict then eliminate private gun ownership.

How do you turn the United States into a Gun Free Zone? Simply put, you criminalize possession of all firearms and ammunition and confiscate what already exits.

Here are just a few reasons why this would not work.

The Second Amendment would need to be repealed, eroded or reinterpreted to the point where it removes the right of citizens to own firearms and ammunition. While not completely impossible, in totality it is highly improbable at this point in our history.

Getting Americans to turn over their firearms wouldn’t be easy. Compulsory buybacks – as witnessed in other countries, would be even less successful here. At that point, a purge would require going door to door to pick up what citizens have refused to surrender. The cost in dollars and lives would be high.

The knowledge on how to build a firearm is readily available. Anyone with minimal mechanical skills can fashion a simple working gun from a $10 trip to Home Depot. Most certainly basic, but it doesn’t take much to progress from there. In other parts of the world, sophisticated home-based firearms and ammunition are readily produced using rudimentary tools.

Some guns will have to remain. The State, including federal, state & local authorities and the military will always need guns to enforce this new reality. They will also be needed to protect the members of the government and the government itself. Protection for the key members of the economy, most likely in the form of private armed security forces will be required.

Then of course there are the criminals – or terrorists who are nothing more than thug criminals with a “cause”. These are the people whose very livelihood is made through illegal means. Making guns more illegal than they already are for them is not going to deter someone who breaks the law anyway.

What begins to emerge is a society where the ruling and economic elite are well protected by the very element they won’t allow the normal citizen to have. For the ordinary citizen, crime will not have been reduced. The most likely outcome is crime will dramatically increase, as citizens will have no means to prevent themselves from becoming a victim. The promised sense of security in this new world will be exposed as a lie.

Despite what some would have you believe, firearms are being used successfully to defend normal citizens’ lives every day. And not every successful defense requires the discharge of the firearm. It’s presence alone is often enough to save a life.

A world without guns in anything but. It is a simply a world of discrimination where very few will be granted the privilege to defend themselves and a large population of those who will not. It is a world where someone else has already decided you do not have the right to ensure your own safety.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #aworldwithoutguns‬, ‪#‎discrimination‬, ‪#‎privilege‬, ‪#‎2ndamendment‬, ‪#‎righttoselfdefense‬

Thanksgiving Dinner Discussion

For this year’s Thanksgiving wishes, the White House asked Americans around the country to talk about national security over dinner. Following the former chief of staff & current Chicago mayor’s strategy of “You never let a serious crisis go to waste.”, the White House chose to push this latest chapter of gun control agenda on this national holiday.

The events that precipitated this were of course the horrific attacks on the citizens of Paris. Never mind that the fully automatic firearms and explosives used in the attacks were illegal in France anyway, or that private ownership and defensive use of firearms in France is almost unheard of. Those events, and the national call for caution in accepting refugees from the war torn Middle Eastern region can only mean one thing – pushing for more ways to restrict legal firearm ownership in the United States.

At issue, the use of the ultra-secretive terror watch list to be used as a means to deny purchasing a firearm from a Federal Firearms Licensee. How could any ‘reasonable’ person object to linking a terrorist watch list into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)? Could it be the Congress and the NRA want to allow gun sales to terrorists?!?

Once we stop laughing at the absurdity of the suggestion, we find the heart of the issue is the watchlisting process. Intended to be a mechanism to assist the national intelligence and security services, the list includes known or suspected terrorists. So what’s the problem? Perhaps it’s the fact that any US citizen or foreign national as well as their family and associates, can be included on the list for suspicion of terrorist acts, activity, or association with someone who is on the list – through no fault of their own, based on the loose standard of ‘reasonable suspicion’. If you have a little extra time and want to read about the program, Google “Watchlisting Guidance”.

The end result is any one of us could find ourselves on the Watchlist for a variety of suspicious, non-terrorist related activities on this nebulous list without ever knowing it. All of this occurs without judicial oversight or the ability of the named individual to mount any form of defense.

Should an individual discover they are on the Watchlist, most likely from being denied boarding an aircraft as a result of being on the subset No-Fly List; they can file a complaint through Traveler Redress Inquiry Program. Of course, they will never be told of a change in their status or the reasons why they were placed on the Watchlist.
The United States is a “a nation of laws, not a nation of men.” If we allow our Constitutional protected Second Amendment rights to be stripped away without due process in the name of national security, what is next; freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, or our freedom altogether? Where does it end?

So while we were discussing this latest attempt to expand the list of restrictions to lawful activity, here’s a few items we didn’t get a chance to talk about:

Homeless Veterans
Veterans unable to get medical care from the Department of Veteran Affairs
Accountability for the American citizens killed in Benghazi
Lack of prosecution of existing Federal firearms statutes
Border security & immigration policy

Maybe we’ll get to these topics over Christmas dinner.

Bob

#oddstuffing ‪#‎thanksgivingdinnerconversation‬, ‪#‎watchlistingguideance‬, ‪#‎2ndamendment‬, ‪#‎freedom‬

Eating an Elephant

By now you’ve heard California’s Lt. Governor has kicked off his 2018 gubernatorial campaign by proposing a new set of gun control measures. His proposal is inappropriately called the Safety for All Act of 2016.

There are two things to look at here, the political rational and initiative itself.

Unfortunately for California, this is more of a sly political move than anything. Every bit of opposition, criticism of the proposal or the Lt. Governor himself, brings his name into the press and public arena a little bit more. In other words, massive free campaign advertising. The timing is also important. By putting this on the 2016 ballot during a Presidential election where the presumptive Democratic Party Presidential candidate is a woman (sorry Bernie fans), far more of the Democratic base will be energized and going to the poles.

Even worse for California, the proposal does nothing to enhance the public’s safety. It only creates additional barriers and costs for legal firearms owners, as well as creating criminals from current legal activity.

There are a number of sections in the proposal. So I don’t rant forever, I’ll just focus on one: ammunition.

Anyone wanting to purchase ammunition will be required to obtain a State issued ID card, which will include a background check, for $50 for two years. While $50 may not sound like a large sum, this requirement will disproportionally impact lower income individuals.
Ammunition sellers would need to be State licensed. Employees would need to have State Certificate of Eligibility certificates and all ammunition would need to be behind the counter. Every purchase must be face-to-face – no out of state or Internet orders. All purchases would be recorded and point-of-sale background checks run. All of these serve no purpose other than adding costs and barriers for legal consumers.

Think this proposal is the end? Not so fast. Here are a couple of items this new system would enable. Keep in mind these are not things I dreamed up, these have come up already.

Consumers would only be able purchase ammunition in calibers in which they have firearms registered with the state. Never mind the fact you can legally change calibers, manufacture your own firearms or legally own firearms that are not registered with the State. Consumers would only be able to purchase ‘X’ number of rounds at any given time. Consumers would only be able purchase the type, brand and characteristics of ammunition approved by the State.
So why is ammunition the new front for Gun Control? Part of the rational comes from their interpretation of the Second Amendment.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In essence, the logic is: “It doesn’t say a single thing about the right to own bullets.” The idea that the framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights would have differentiated between arms and ammunition is of course ludicrous. But to date the lower courts have been very forgiving of ammunition restriction laws, either not acknowledging a Second Amendment right or allowing what they call ‘slight’ infringements. Without a definitive ruling from the Supreme Court, this logic may be used as part of a wider gun control scheme.

So where do these types of proposals come from? One of the major forces behind this ballot initiative is the San Francisco based Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. If you’d like to see their target list, take a look at Search Gun Laws by Policy page at http://smartgunlaws.org/search-gun-law-by-gun-policy/ Then take a look at the proposals in your own community and you’ll likely find much of it tied back to this group’s recommendations.

Why is opposition to this ballot initiative and other proposals important? The likelihood of an Australian-style forced gun forfeiture being successfully implemented in the United States is highly unlikely. What is more possible, and is the current strategy, is to take small, incremental, “common sense and reasonable” bites out of the Second Amendment until there is nothing left. It goes back to the old saying: How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

Bob

#oddstuffing #eatinganelephant #2ndamendment

No Victim Zone

Once again we have witnessed despicable acts of savagery against innocent men and women. In the Paris attacks alone (this was not the only attack over the weekend) the latest count indicate 129 killed and 352 injured. Why? Because a group of extremists chose to make their ideological statements with bullets and bombs. And while we are shocked, we should not be surprised. The only thing worse than the horrific acts of violence we have seen in the last three days will be what some demented mind will think up next.

Unfortunately, they succeeded here. Above and beyond the killed and injured, they terrorized the population of a major city, shut down the entire nation of France and sent shock waves around the world.

I’m going to make the bold statement that this does not have to be the way things are. We do not have to bear witness to the next set of attacks. We do not have to be victims. All it takes is one person or one small group to stop this.

If you’re thinking, there’s no way a person or small group, unarmed or even lightly armed, can make a difference in the face of these heavily armed, desperate men, this is my response. Bullshit!

Here are a few recent reminders: Three unarmed servicemen stopped an armed attack on a Paris bound train. A lone man stands up to an armed shooter in an Oregon community college. A nursing mother shoots and stops an attack by multiple armed home invaders in North Carolina.

What do these events, and many, many more have in common? Everyday people who decided to stand up and say NO! NOT me, NOT my family, NOT here, NOT now.

The state, be it national, state, county or municipality, is never going to be able to assure your safety. That job is yours and yours alone. And while you should have some kind of force multiplier available to you at all times, you always possess the one weapon you need to stop an attack. Your attitude.

It doesn’t matter if it’s a hate filled extremist looking to terrorize the world or the local meth addict looking to score his next high. It will only be stopped when enough people stand up and take direct, decisive action. It only stops when we decide to say NO! NOT me, NOT my family, NOT here, NOT now. Now is the time to declare yourself a No Victim Zone.

Bob

#oddstuffing #novictimzone #2ndamendment