[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles

Title: The Coming National Gun Ban – and How the States Can Resist
Source: American Thinker
URL Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/arti ... how_the_states_can_resist.html
Published: Oct 12, 2016
Author: Michael Filozof
Post Date: 2016-10-12 11:40:32 by Stoner
Keywords: None
Views: 409
Comments: 2

The law of averages predicts that at some time in the future, perhaps as soon as 2017, the Democratic Party will once again control the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress. When that happens, the next Democratic president -- be it Hillary Clinton or someone else -- will sign into law a sweeping, foreign-style gun ban.

The legislation has already been written. H.R. 4269 would enact a national, permanent ban on the manufacture and sale of so-called “assault weapons” and all firearm magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The bill, introduced last December, already has149 Democratic co-sponsors (218 are needed to pass the House).

H.R. 4269 would ban all AR-15 and AK-type rifles and all civilian versions of military rifles produced anywhere in the word within the past 60 years or so. The bill would also ban all parts kits, stripped receivers, “bump-fire” stocks, thumbhole stocks, trigger cranks, so-called “compliant” rifles, and “any… characteristic that can function as a [pistol] grip.” Law enforcement is exempt from the bill’s provisions.

H.R. 4269 is not a “kick down the door and confiscate ‘em” bill. Existing rifles and magazines are “grandfathered” (but the transfer of existing magazines is permanently prohibited). Gun banners know that it is literally impossible to perform a door-to-door gun confiscation in a nation of 300 million people, and that any attempt to do so would certainly be met with violence. Consequently, they have pre-empted the “Come and take it” crowd by employing a long-term strategy. Once the manufacture and sale of certain weapons is prohibited, it is only a matter of time before the legislation would be amended to outlaw the transfer of “grandfathered” rifles as well as magazines, thus enacting a de facto confiscation within a generation.

Although banning “assault weapons” is a Democratic proposal and a plank that Hillary Clinton has campaigned upon (she called the National Rifle Association an “enemy” along with Iran) it should not be assumed that all Republicans would oppose it. Republican presidential hopefuls Chris Christie, John Kasich, and Rudy Giuliani have all supported gun control in the past.

The impetus to push such legislation through Congress would likely come from a high-profile shooting or terrorist act that, like the Reichstag fire, would receive extensive media attention and provide the propaganda necessary for gun controllers like Chuck Schumer, the next Democratic Senate Majority Leader, to enact their pre-existing agenda. Republicans might find themselves accused of being “soft on terrorism” if they voted against gun control after such an event. Indeed, President Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, has already stated publicly that domestic gun control is necessary as an anti-terrorism measure.

But banning “assault weapons” has nothing to do with combatting terrorism, or, for that matter, garden-variety street crime. It is a well-established fact that “assault weapons” (and long guns in general) are used in only the tiniest fraction of crimes. Handguns are used in nearly all street crimes committed with firearms. Furthermore, it’s entirely possible for a homicidal maniac to commit a mass shooting with a “sporting” arm. In Great Britain, a deranged individual killed 12 people with a licensed, registered bolt-action rimfire rifle -- after semi-automatics and handguns were banned and confiscated in that nation. And in Norway, where “assault weapons” had also been banned, Anders Breivik murdered 77 people, most of them with a Ruger Mini-14 sporting rifle. Both of the rifles used in those crimes are specifically exempted from H.R. 4269.

If banning “assault weapons” has nothing to do with crime or terrorism, why are the Democrats so eagerly in favor of it? The answer is that they have a Hobbesian worldview, in which an all-powerful “Leviathan” government has a complete monopoly on the exercise of power. The Founders recognized that military-quality arms, not sporting arms, are an indispensable tool for challenging government oppression. Contemporary Democrats, who reject the Founders’ teaching, believe that such arms must be banned precisely because they can be used to challenge Leviathan’s authority.

If H.R. 4269 or a similar bill becomes law, do not expect the Supreme Court to come to the rescue and strike it down. If there is a Democratic president and Democratic Senate next year, the vacancy on the Supreme Court created by the death of pro-Second Amendment justice Antonin Scalia will certainly be filled by a liberal, anti-gun justice. And there is a significant likelihood that aging justices Ginsberg, Kennedy, and Breyer could also be replaced by the next president. Their seats would undoubtedly also be filled by anti-gun, left-wing jurists.

If the Supreme Court upholds a national “assault weapons” ban, what recourse do the people have? In deep-blue “liberal” states like New York, California, Massachusetts and Connecticut, the answer is “None.” These states have already enacted legislation nearly identical to H.R. 4269, with very little opposition and widespread public support.

But conservative, pro-gun “red” states might have one final ace in the hole.

Liberal gun-banners have long held the position that the Second Amendment only protects the right of state militias to bear arms, and that such a right does not extend to the general public not enrolled in the militia. Justice Scalia destroyed that argument with a close textual analysis of the Second Amendment in the landmark gun-rights case District of Columbia v. Heller. But in a virulent dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens reiterated the liberal “only militias can have guns” interpretation.

Should Stevens’s dissent become the majority opinion in a future case, conservative, pro-gun state legislatures could turn the “militias only” argument against the gun-banners by passing legislation expanding the membership of their state militias to all adult residents of the state, and specifically empowering all adults to purchase military-style semi-automatic rifles and magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds.

Were such a scenario to occur, the Federal government might try to suppress the arming of the newly-redefined state militias by banning arms and ammunition sales to them through the Interstate Commerce Clause. Such action would precipitate a constitutional crisis between the states and the Federal government.

Of course, the possibility that the Federal government would cause a national crisis by suppressing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is the very reason why the Founders wrote the Second Amendment in the first place. Will there be a sequel to the “shot heard ‘round the world” on April 19, 1775?

We might be about to find out.


I know there are differing opinions on this topic here, but I thought this was an interesting article.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Stoner (#0)

H.R. 4269 – dead in committee since December 2015

H.R. 4269 - All Major Actions

All Actions: H.R.4269 — 114th Congress (2015-2016)

All Bill Information (Except Text)

Bill History – Congressional Record References

Date – All Actions
01/15/2016 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.

Type of Action: Committee Consideration
Action By: House Judiciary
12/16/2015 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Type of Action: Introduction and Referral

Action By: House of Representatives
12/16/2015 Introduced in House
Type of Action: Introduction and Referral
Action By: House of Representatives

nolu chan  posted on  2016-10-12   13:13:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Stoner (#0)

Were such a scenario to occur, the Federal government might try to suppress the arming of the newly-redefined state militias by banning arms and ammunition sales to them through the Interstate Commerce Clause. Such action would precipitate a constitutional crisis between the states and the Federal government.

Of course, the possibility that the Federal government would cause a national crisis by suppressing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is the very reason why the Founders wrote the Second Amendment in the first place. Will there be a sequel to the “shot heard ‘round the world” on April 19, 1775?

We might be about to find out.

To address the first paragraph and complete its final sentence: "Such action would precipitate a constitutional crisis between the states and the Federal government, which would be resolved by the Supreme Court in favor of the federal government's position."

To answer the question at the end of the second paragraph, and the final sentence of the piece, the answer is that we will almost certainly not see an armed rebellion over the Second Amendment. What we will probably see is a tense period in which various angry yahoos in various places go shoot up a shopping mall or a police station, various yahoos gunned down in the act or entrapped and tried, and then a gradually dying down of tensions as people adjust to the new reality.

But it is possible that a committed revolutionary group will actually organize itself and start carrying out an internal guerilla. In that case, the full intelligence, military and paramilitary (and taxation) forces of the United States, at all levels, will operate jointly to crush the nascent rebellion. And crush it they will.

The first "shot heard 'round the world", at Concord Bridge in 1775 resulted in years of the American Continentals getting chased all over their own country, with much destruction, until the French, Spanish and Dutch intervened against the English to "get" their traditional rival while the British were entangled in America. Not alone, but as part of a coalition of all of the other major world powers, specifically with the defeat of the English Navy by the French Navy, and the doubling of the American forces by the arrival of the professional French Army, the Americans gained their independence.

In 1861, the second "shot heard round the world" was fired at Bull Run. In the second war of American Independence, a much larger, much more cohesive, and much more powerful - indeed, the second most powerful army in the world - American Confederacy was systematically starved, defeated on the field, burnt out and crushed down by the American government side. Nobody came to the aid of the Confederacy, and alone, the Confederacy could not defeat the much more powerful Union.

And in 2017, what happens if some yahoos go out and fire the "third shot heard round the world"? No foreigners other than jihadists will come within 1000 miles of supporting them. They will be outgunned, outnumbered and alone. And they will die. And the vast majority of the country will cheer as they do, seeing them as nothing but violent criminals, radical rednecks, Klansmen, Nazi sympathizers and - in the end - losers.

I've seen before on this board angry old men spout in rage about how people - presumably not them - are going to pick up guns and attack the government. That has actually been offered as a REASON why the normal democratic process cannot systematically dismantle the things they hold dear. Now the deadly truth: the democratic process can, in fact, systematically dismantle EVERYTHING that they, and anybody else, holds dear. There is no fortress of guns into which people can retreat to resist the march of the democracy and the laws, and the people who actually DO resort to a fortress of guns will be bombed and shot and gassed out of those fortresses, and thereby removed from the electorate.

The only way to fight in this democratic republic is by persuading the majority of the people. Because the Republicans very stupidly chose to align with the interests of a narrow, super-rich elite, Republicans have been resisting all necessary social welfare for the past 90 years, since the New Deal. Because the social welfare is, in fact, absolutely necessary for human survival at reasonable standards of living in modern urban society, as time has marched on the Republicans have become a smaller, narrower and crankier minority. The country has rejected their economic logic because it is antiquated, obsolete, unworkable and, increasingly, harsh and callous.

Republicans have resorted to social warfare on emotional issues, but truth is that Americans in general have always been pretty libertarian and independent. Some people REALLY care about gay sex, for example, but MOST Americans don't. Same thing with abortion. Same thing with pot.

The morals police shot their wad with Prohibition.

So the Republicans have to change something, or they will be a permanent, oppressed minority.

The right answer is a rethink on economic matters. To accept the reality of the necessity of a strong set of social supports - education, health insurance, pensions. Get real on economic issues, and there are plenty of Americans who are not comfortable at all with the pink brigades sashaying into the schools and the like.

But those Americans will tolerate the gays and abortion and open borders if the opposition is talking about taking away their pensions and health care, and trickle down economics (which did not work, ever, and which never will).

In short, Republicans need to GROW UP, as opposed to going berserk and getting them shot in compounds out in the woods. If Republicans will grow up in their economic thinking and become adults, there is a clear path to power for them. But if they've just gotta stand with the billionaires, they're going to simply be flushed down the toilet by a public that is not going to buy their nonsense anymore.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-12   14:06:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com