Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

I got this in my email this morning from Huffington Post;

The video they show with the story is heavily edited by Newsy to make it appear as if a father who just lost his son in the Newtown shooting was heckled by pro-gun activists at the meeting;

But here’s the whole video picked up at Twitchy. The exchange happens at about 15 minutes.

Actually, he asks the whole roomful of people who needs semiautomatic rifles with large capacity “clips” (his word, not mine). After looking around the room, he says “see, no one can answer” and then he gets an answer from some people “2d Amendment”. No one heckled him – they were answering his question…a question to which he fully expected an answer.

MSNBC’s Morning Joe thought it was a good idea to mischaracterize the exchange as well;

This has me so angry that I need some liquid depressants. It’d make a preacher spit. F**k these assholes.

The Land of Enchantment is a physically beautiful land indeed, yet one with the misfortune to be so traditionally misgoverned by our liberal Democrat majority as to be relegated too frequently to the very lowest rankings of the states when it comes to poverty, education, health, etc. Once in a while, however, we do find something besides our majestic landscapes to be proud of. A statement just issued by the New Mexico Sheriffs’ Association and signed by 29 of 33 county sheriffs, declaring that their oaths of office don’t require them to enforce federal laws they consider unconstitutional, provides New Mexicans with just such a moment. While I’ve read and heard similar statements from individual sheriffs and police chiefs in other states, I‘ve not seen anything comparable from a statewide law enforcement association.

The Sunday, Jan. 27th, Albuquerque Journal published an article written by Mike Bush of the Mountain View Telegraph quoting several county sheriffs from around the state to the effect that they will refuse to support the President’s attempt to restrict constitutionally protected firearms ownership. The ABQ Sunday article is not posted on their website but there is a link to a Jan. 24th article by the same reporter, Mike Bush, published by the Mountain View Telegraph. The ABQ piece appears to be a fleshed out version of the original and reveals that the Sheriff Dan Houston of Bernalillo County (that’s Albuquerque and the state’s largest metro area) is one of the signers. The Sheriffs’ Association website has posted a press release [.pdf] containing this:

The undersigned sheriffs of the New Mexico Sheriffs’ Association
On the issues of gun control
It is the position of the New Mexico Sheriffs’ Association that we will honor our oath of office
Which states;
I [………….] Sheriff of [………..] County, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America, the constitution and laws of the State of New Mexico and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of my office to the best of my abilities, SO HELP ME GOD.

That pledge is followed by thirty names although the ABQ Journal article says there were only 29 signatories. I am quite pleased that my sheriff’s name is among them. Also noteworthy are the names of several sheriffs from northern, heavily Democrat, areas of the state including the über liberal Santa Fe County. Both news reports also point out that support for enforcing existing laws and tightening the background checking process is widespread among these same sheriffs. They do want to reduce gun violence, just not by denying their constituents their 2d Amendment rights.

Readers should consider using the action of the NMSA as a catalyst to inspire your own law enforcement leaders to follow suit. Sheriffs in Missouri and Utah have also taken concerted actions so this is a movement that is taking hold. Faced with the reality that any new federal gun control laws could encounter widespread nullification by those very public servants needed to enforce them, this overweening administration might well decide to back away from any such constitutional confrontation. But even if Obama proceeds in his arrogant gun grab, we the people will know we’re not alone in our fight. It seems highly unlikely that any sheriff who signed that pledge is going to permit Eric Holder’s BATF or any other federal agents to disarm the citizens of his county. If that proves not to be, then:

Molon labe…

Crossposted at American Thinker

Adam Kokesh sends us his video foray into the crowd at a “Million Moms” march for gun control in Washington, DC. He’s asking for a conversation and all he gets in return is platitudes;

I think it’s fairly funny that Adam meets the same kind of people I met when I went to the anti-war rallies last decade. They seem to irritate him as much as they irritated me. He says something about slogans not being effective, but he engaged in the same type of thing during his IVAW years.

But, yeah, the point comes through – no one on that side is interested in having a discussion. We’re supposed to just agree with them and shut up.

A report on the march from Time Magazine;

Once the crowd arrived at the monument, speakers called for a ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition and for universal background checks on gun sales.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan told the crowd it’s not about taking away Second Amendment gun rights, but about gun safety and saving lives. He said he and President Barack Obama would do everything they could to enact gun control policies.

“This is about trying to create a climate in which our children can grow up free of fear,” Duncan said. “This march is a starting point; it is not an ending point … We must act, we must act, we must act.”

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D.C.’s non-voting representative in Congress, said the gun lobby can be stopped, and the crowd chanted back, “Yes, we can.”

“We are all culpable if we do nothing now,” Norton said

James Agenbroad, 78, of Garrett Park, Md., carried a handwritten sign on cardboard that read “Repeal the 2nd Amendment.” He called it the only way to stop mass killings because he thinks the Supreme Court will strike down any other restrictions on guns.

“You can repeal it,” he said. “We repealed prohibition.”

Funny he should mention Prohibition – that amendment made a previously legal product illegal, too. Odd thing about the Democrats – they find all sorts of stuff in the Bill of Rights that isn’t there, but when they can’t, well it’s time to repeal the amendments that are in there to protect the minority from the majority’s tyranny.

And they’re not in the majority anyway. The Million Moms Facebook page (where the little club started according to Huffington Post) had 47,000 fans this morning – that’s .0016% of Americans.

The Washington Times‘ research into the linkage between gun laws and gun crimes shows no relation between the two. States with stricter gun laws tend to have higher rates of gun crime;

For example, New York, even before it approved the strictest gun-control measures in the country last week, was ranked fourth among the states in strength of gun laws by the Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence, but was also in the top 10 in firearm homicide rates in 2011, according to the FBI.

Meanwhile, North Dakota was near the bottom in its firearm homicide, firearm robbery and firearm assault rates, but also had some of the loosest gun laws and worst compliance with turning over mental health records to the background check system.

Analysts said the data underscore that there are no simple or easy broad answers to combating gun violence, which is a complex equation involving gun-ownership rates, how ready authorities are to prosecute gun crimes and how widely they ban ownership.

But, in an environment when legislators feel an impulse to do anything in order to justify their jobs, facts don’t have any place in the discussion. If Dianne Feinstein’s Scary-Looking Weapon Ban passes and more gun crimes happen, it will be because her law didn’t go far enough. Two of our most famous gun crimes happened during the last weapon ban – the Columbine shooting and the DC sniper. And there was the spate of school shootings during Bill Clinton’s last year in office.

The Times continues;

“There do appear to be some gun controls which work, all of them relatively moderate, popular and inexpensive,” the researchers wrote. “Thus, there is support for a gun-control policy organized around gun-owner licensing or purchase permits (or some other form of gun-buyer screening); stricter local dealer licensing; bans on possession of guns by criminals and mentally ill people; stronger controls over illegal carrying; and possibly discretionary add-on penalties for committing felonies with a gun.

“On the other hand, popular favorites such as waiting periods and gun registration do not appear to affect violence rates,” he said.

So, the “do something” knee-jerk legislation doesn’t affect gun crime, but government doing the job they should be doing anyway does seem to have some effect. But people who write laws for a living, think they can appear to be doing something useful by writing more laws. Well, there was a backlash from voters in 1994 and there will be another one next year.

Well, we knew it was coming – Senator Diane Feinstein that moron foisted upon us by the fruits and nuts in California introduced her new updated version of what everyone is calling an Assault Weapon Ban. From The Hill;

“I have worked on this for a long time,” said Feinstein in an interview with USA Today. “I’m not a newcomer or a novice to guns.

“The NRA sort of specialized in trying to denigrate me, but I don’t think there’s anyone around that’s spent 20 years on this subject, plus some,” she added.

Says the woman who bans bayonet lugs and belt fed semi-automatic rifles. That will make us all safer, won’t it?

Here’s a photo someone took of the list of weapons that she’s banning. looks like they finally got the Mini-14, but I don’t see any Glocks on the list, maybe these old eyes missed the most dangerous weapon in the history of firearms. I blew it up so you you’ll have to click a couple of times to read it;

USAToday says this is the essence of her bill;

Ban the sale, transfer, importation or manufacturing of about 150 named firearms, plus certain rifles, handguns and shotguns fitted for detachable magazines and having at least one military characteristic.

Strengthen the 1994 ban by moving from a two- to a one-characteristic test to determine what constitutes an assault weapon.

Ban firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons.”

Ban the importation of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.

Ban high-capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

I wonder how many thumbhole stocks have been used in crimes. I’m still trying to figure out WTF a “bullet button” is. Now the USAToday article says that Feinstein’s ban grandfathers weapons owned on the day that the ban begins, but we all know that she said initially that she wanted complete registration of grandfathered weapons, but the USAToday article doesn’t mention that fact – I don’t know if she dropped the proposal or if USAToday is just leaving it out for some reason.

Feinstein’s biggest foe in the ban is going to be Harry Reid who stands to lose 19 Democrats in the Senate if there’s repercussions at the ballot box next year. I think it’s too late for him to worry about that. Just all of the talk in the last few weeks have pretty much sealed the fates of those Senators whether the bill passes or not.

Thanks to Old Trooper for the link.