Showing posts with label terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label terrorism. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Quit the NRA

The NRA released a statement today that it believes that those on terror watch lists deserve to have their constitutional rights denied, specifically the right to buy a gun. Such a statement should be condemned by those who support freedom because the NRA took the politically expedient route.
I take specific exception to the part where the NRA believes that a sale should be delayed while the investigation is completed. Do they mean the up to three day delay that currently exists when someone has an old parking warrant on their record? Or do they mean the sale is indefinitely postponed until the FBI gives the go-ahead? What exactly is their plan for 'due process'? No one should be added to a watchlist that has no real criteria for being placed on. Kids, senators, and congressmen have been on it for heaven's sake!
The Constitution is meant to protect against a tyrannical government, one that will label citizens who oppose it terrorists or traitors. The Bill of Rights was intended to check the unlimited powers that Great Britain used to brutally suppress the colonists who cried aloud against the abuses of their deaf government. We face a threat from Islamic terrorism; a religion and a mentality that is hateful to the central tenets of its doctrine. We are faced with a war upon our people and our culture. More laws are not the answer.
The murderer in Orlando was under FBI surveillance, but that investigation was apparently pulled at the request of Hillary Clinton's State Department. His father visited the White House and may have met with the president. His ex-wife knew about this plot, yet did nothing. His employer was afraid to discipline him because he was a Muslim. He was not on any watchlist at the time he bought his gun legally, with a background check. This 'solution' would not have prevented this atrocity. 49 people are dead and 102 families torn apart because the government failed to identify and stop a terrorist.
More laws and 'checks' are not the answer. Admitting we have a problem with Islamic terror and utilizing the law enforcement resources we already have are the solution. Additionally, end gun free zones and allow people to defend themselves. No one should have to cower in a bathroom and wait to be shot. You may not succeed, but you deserve the chance to fight back effectively.

The Second Amendment is about the slippery slope. The NRA institutionally does not understand that. They have never understood that, instead willing to give in for the few instead of the rights of the many.The NRA has for too long supported compromise, allowed state-by-state Bloomberg assaults on gun rights, and too often supported outright racist gun laws. Until the NRA gets active in stopping all forms of infringement, it does not deserve your support. An organization that does so little and compromises so much is not worthy of your time and money.

When the time comes for gun owners to be treated as seditious and terrorists, the NRA will support the round-up. Due process means nothing to the NRA; they prefer to allow unchecked government power to say who can and can't own a gun.

While terrorism is a serious concern, putting names on a list or starting investigations without probable cause is a slippery slope. What is to stop the Federal government from declaring all gun owners to be domestic terrorists? Did you click 'Like' on a post about the Bundy Ranch? Now you are a terrorist supporter. Donate to a 'radical' gun rights group like the Second Amendment Foundation? Now you are a financial backer of terrorism. Think that's not likely? How many Japanese-Americans in the late 1930s thought that they would be put in concentration camps by their own country?

Nevadans, we have accomplished MUCH without the NRA. Leave them behind, cancel or don't renew your memberships. Donate to the Nevada Firearm Coalition, Nevadans for State Gun Rights, or work on your own to further gun rights. As individuals banding together, we can succeed at our goals without a bloated, political, and compromised organization. 
For those that criticize me calling out the NRA: What have they done for you lately? Where were they early on when Bloomberg was collecting signatures to ban private gun sales? Why did they trash open carry in 1995? Why didn't they fight harder in 2015 for school carry and constitutional carry? What kind of gun rights organization is this? It's not. It's a political, 'feel good' club for good ol' boys. If you like a $35 magazine to read on the toilet, you can give them your money, but that's all they're worth.

For those that argue we aren't doing anything to stop terrorists from getting guns: How would the proposed laws have stopped this massacre? Answer that question first. Tell me how someone not under active investigation or a prohibited person can be detected and stopped if his friends and family say nothing.

No compromise.

#QuitNRA

Sunday, December 6, 2015

Obama, Terrorists, and Gun Control

The president, in both Sunday night’s speech and his weekly address, sullied the memories of the victims by beating on the gun control drum. At least he finally one of these attacks by Muslims terrorism, though he watered it down by referring to ‘radicalism.’ In seven years, this was probably the first time President Obama explicitly admitted Islam has a terrorism problem. Gun control, as Obama has admitted, is a priority in his final year of office. In light of this latest Islamic terror attack, Obama is trying to change the subject away from the real issue and push his leftist agenda.

‘Terrorist Loophole’?

There seems to be hidden blueprint for further infringing upon the Second Amendment. After the 2012 Sandy Hook shootings, the call was, among other things, to ban the so-called “gun show and internet loopholes” by banning private sales. After the federal ban failed in Congress, anti-gunners took their show on the road and states, like Nevada, have are facing an onslaught of ‘universal background check’ initiatives and laws.

Each of these infringement offensives have a unique goal to tighten the noose around Second Amendment without addressing the underlying causes of tragedy supporters are tying their efforts to. With universal background checks, all recent high-profile shooters passed a background check or otherwise got their guns in a way that a background check would not have been required (the Sandy Hook murderer killed his mother to get her guns, for example).

Between the Paris attacks and the San Bernardino attacks, leftists began bandying about the term ‘terrorist loophole’ because people on the ‘no-fly list’ of suspected terrorists can legally buy a gun. The ‘boyfriend loophole’, which has less panache, was floating around before that. Interestingly, felonious boyfriends and husbands often get their girlfriends/wives to buy a gun for them in a straw purchase. Leftists see freedom as a series of loopholes. Being consumed by loophole mania, they probably complain about Swiss cheese not being a solid block. One day, they’ll be complaining about the “Melvin M. Johnson loophole” because he’s the last person who can legally buy a gun.

One would suspect that if someone was on a terrorist watch list, then the FBI would have them under surveillance and know if they bought a gun. Or the components for a pipe or pressure cooker bomb. The lunacy of this working is lost on the leftists. Buying ephedrine when a cold has reduced you to mouth-breathing is about as intensive as buying a gun, but meth still gets made.

The cornerstone of American jurisprudence is due process of law.  Without it, we are subject to the whims and Byzantine workings of bureaucracy. All other categories of prohibited persons have been adjudicated in some fashion; the checks and balances of a day in court ensuring that someone isn’t being capriciously deprived of their rights.
The no-fly list, a subset of the Terrorist Screening Center’s list of surveillance targets, lists nearly 50,000 people, though the actual numbers are secret. Wikipedia has a small list of notable cases of persons, not actually terrorists, who have been stopped from flying, including some who were apparently added to the list in retaliation for something the government didn’t like.

The ACLU calls the process “[…] to challenge their blacklisting is grossly insufficient and violates the U.S. Constitution’s due process guarantee.” It goes on to describe the challenge process, which is an entirely bureaucratic process without court review. 
“If you are a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, and the TSC determines that you are on the No Fly List, DHS TRIP will send you a letter informing you of your status on the No Fly List and providing the option to submit and receive additional information. If you choose that option, DHS TRIP will provide a second letter identifying the general criterion under which you have been placed on the No Fly List and possibly including an unclassified summary of the reasons for your inclusion on the List. You should know that the government’s summary likely will not include all of its reasons for your placement on the List, and in some cases the government will choose not to provide any summary at all. The government also will not provide you any of the evidence it relied upon in deciding to place you on the List, and it may also withhold information in its possession that undercuts its basis for putting you on the list. Finally, the government does not provide a live hearing at which you could testify, or give you an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses against you.” 
One still could file a lawsuit, but only after the fact. Most citizens learn of their status on the No Fly List by attempting to board a flight. Imagine going to gun store, only to be denied the ability to purchase a firearm. You would have first find out why you were denied, then begin the appeal process with the FBI, which you couldn’t do until the Dept. of Homeland Security removed you from its terrorist watch list. It’s a Kafkaesque nightmare meant to ensnare people. With the IRS targeting conservative groups illegally, one can imagine a rogue government agency or bureaucrat (or even under direction from President Obama or another leftist president) actually considering some gun owners (such as we of Nevada Carry) potential domestic terrorists.

Placing names on a list to restrict rights that is established by arbitrary criteria, secret information, and nearly impossible to challenge is un-American. If the ‘no-fly’ list didn’t have problems such as government security workers on it or listing children and people with similar names by accident, the argument might be valid. However, as we saw today, the San Bernardino terrorists committed their atrocity without going through a single so-called loophole. In fact, despite coming from countries that are rife with terrorism and radicalization factories and communicating online with suspected terrorist sympathizers, the California jihadist went unnoticed by law enforcement.

As with background checks, the ‘terrorist loophole’ non-sense is coming to the states. California Assemblyman Mike Gatto told the Sacramento Bee “It’s safe to say that if people who are under a mental-health hold cannot buy a weapon, then I think it makes sense that people who have been deemed so dangerous that they can’t board an airplane should be in that same category.” It’s just not that simple, unless Gatto approves of using an inaccurate database and trampling on the Fifth Amendment right to due process. Of course, since it involves guns, the Democrat doesn’t mind. Surely the legislature which banned open carry in 1967 because black people were doing it will easily pass this law.

Chris Cox, executive director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action gave the best reaction to President Obama’s rhetoric earlier this week. 
“The National Rifle Association is not to blame. Neither is our Second Amendment freedom. An act of evil unfolded in California. President Obama used it not as a moment to inform or calm the American people; rather, he exploited it to push his gun control agenda. Policy discussions should be intellectually honest and based on facts, not politics. And the fact remains that California has already adopted President Obama’s gun control wish list: "universal" background checks, registration, waiting periods, gun bans, magazine bans and an expansion of prohibited gun categories. But those laws did nothing to prevent this horrific crime from taking place. Nothing.” 
Obama and the leftists push the ‘terrorist loophole’ because it narrows who can buy guns. It sounds great and they think it can pass in the aftermath of this tragedy. What they are really doing is broadening the definition of who is prohibited from possessing firearms. The terror watch lists have no real criteria. If the Obama Administration decides that those who read this blog as potential terrorists, you could wind up on the list. It’s not far-fetched.

Quit with the Gun Control Already

Leftists and politicians do not understand that laws and disarming the law-abiding will result in safety. They are so deluded by their hate for guns, and some salivating over a disarmed populace, helpless to resist their agenda, they will use any tragedy, any excuse, fabricate any data, manipulate any statistics, and make any lie to promote their evil. Under President Obama’s administration, we’ve seen more true high-profile mass shootings than under any other recent president. Knowing that the media and the White House is behind them, those that would rob you of your rights have gun into full-battle mode. At no time in American history has the Second Amendment been under such.

Anti-gunners like the president are hecklers; they ask only rhetorical questions that ignore truth and facts. They rely on hyperbole, logical fallacies, and capitalizing on crises. They offer no solutions, only restrictions.

Leftists, who have asserted that their policies hold all the answers for life's problems, do not have the humility to admit that they are on the wrong side of the issue. Maybe in the '60s and '70s, we could have forgiven their ignorance, but waves of evidence show guns aren't the problem and leftists are so far gone the truth has lost all meaning to them. Lies and distortions have become such a part of their daily life that their capacity for rational thought has been destroyed.

Any attempt to confiscate or infringe any further upon the Second Amendment is likely to result in revolution. President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the establishment Left is pushing America to the brink of armed resistance to the trampling of our rights, our faiths, our freedoms, and our way of life.

It is said that Social Security is the third-rail of a American politics. For those unfamiliar with the term, the third rail is a electrified rail that subways and trams (usually in the East), draw power from. Touching it will kill you. The Second Amendment is the hangman’s rope in American politics and politicians are busy pulling the noose over their heads.

Although it is stems from the most unfortunate of circumstances, the reaction of the American public rejecting gun control and supporting citizen’s carrying guns for self-defense is most heartening. This nation is waking up to the reality that criminals and terrorists cannot be stopped by laws and to save our own lives in the face of death, we must have a gun and be willing to use it.

-G. C.



California Number One Supplier of Crime Guns to Nevada*

California Governor Jerry Brown criticized states like Nevada and Arizona for having so-called ‘lax’ gun laws. “California has the toughest gun control laws of any state and Nevada and Arizona are wide open. So that's a gigantic backdoor through which any terrorist can walk.” Governor Brown apparently missed the fact that a whole host of California laws were broken by the terrorists in San Bernardino. His state’s draconian gun laws did not prevent this tragedy, but instead reduced the victims to cowering in the face of Islamic terrorists. Hero Shannon Johnson was killed bravely shielding Denise Peraza with his own body.

Arizona Governor Doug Ducey said: 
"All of Arizona mourns for the victims in California. To politicize a tragedy of this magnitude and use it as an opportunity to attack our state is out of bounds. Not only will we be ignoring Gov. Brown's advice, but I call on him to retract his incredibly thoughtless and ill-advised comments.” 
In regards to the Paris terrorist attacks last month, Gov. Ducey said, “These acts serve as a reminder that the world remains at war with radical Islamic terrorists. Our national leaders must react with the urgency and leadership that every American expects to protect our citizens.” Gov. Brown did not shy away from acknowledging the threat of Islamic terror. At least Gov. Brown got one thing right. 
“At the same time, I don’t minimize the significance of this terrorist attack. […] It’s a very clear indication that this is a global phenomenon and that people who are committed to this jihadist doctrine are going to be killing people in very unexpected places. So we have to be, as I said, we have to be on our guard and we have to do whatever we can do.”
Nevada's governor's office, issued a statement Sunday afternoon.
"Nevadans share California's grief during this time of tragedy following the horrific events in San Bernardino. However, Governor Brown’s assertion that our state laws create an opening for terrorists is wrong and irresponsible. This type of political rhetoric is discouraging to hear at a time when all Americans are looking for thoughtful, honest leadership. Governor Sandoval’s top priority has always been the safety and well-being of Nevadans and the millions of tourists who travel to our state annually."
Nevada, California’s Criminal Arms Market?

Everytown Research, the discredited research arm of former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg's anti-gun organization Everytown for Gun Safety, has published 'research' (really just statistics explained in a way that makes Nevada look bad) supposedly drawing the conclusion that Nevada is some sort of arms bazaar to California criminals. The reality is quite the opposite.

Everytown says: “[...]  since 2006, the number of Nevada guns recovered at California crime scenes has increased 94 percent.” According to an ATF firearms trace data (cited by Everytown), in 2006, 361 guns traced, came from Nevada, versus 2013, where the number was 699 guns. Saying the guns were recovered from a crime scene is a lie. The stats used are for all guns traced by the ATF, which includes not just guns from crime scenes, but guns confiscated from felons, for instance. Of course, California itself was the largest source of firearms recovered from criminals or at crime scenes.

The actual sources of the guns are never mentioned. For this to be an accurate comparison and used as evidence for universal background checks, how the guns got into the hands of California criminals is vitally important.
  • How many of these guns were actually bought in sales which would be prohibited by the universal background check initiative?
  • How many of these guns were bought/transferred illegally under existing laws (Straw purchases, illegal street dealers)?
  • How many of these guns were legally brought in or sold/transferred to Californians?
  • How many of these guns were stolen? 

Everytown isn’t interested in answering these questions, only presenting the appearance of a problem where there is none. Now here’s the kicker. The largest out-of-state source for traced guns in Nevada (again, using the same source and definition as Everytown used) is: California!

https://www.atf.gov/file/55016/download

https://www.atf.gov/file/3286/download
Yes, Nevada does have private gun sales that a criminal from California could abuse. However, the onus is on California for infringing upon the Second Amendment rights of its citizens. California is also responsible for an influx of felons. “California’s two-strike felons often come to Nevada to avoid their third felony, and thus a potential 25-to-life sentence, and continue committing their crimes. Nevada’s three strike law doesn’t count out-of-state convictions,” Nevada Carry’s anonymous law enforcement source told us.

California’s Gun Laws Just Don’t Work

An effort, lead by California Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco, seeks to confiscate all grandfathered 10 round plus magazines, among other ineffective measures. California started the ‘assault weapons’ ban back in the 1980s after a mass shooting at McDonalds, later copied at the federal level for ten years. Clearly this ban had no effect on the terrorists. Brown and Newsom, along with Senator Barbara Boxer, who foolishly praised California’s gun laws after the terrorist attack. Boxer, whose brain must be malfunctioning after years of drinking the liberal Kool-Aid, liked the guns law working to speeding law working after illegal street racers plowed into a crowd.

In California, all ‘assault weapons’ must have been registered by 2001 or altered so that they no longer meet the state’s arbitrary criteria. The ‘assault weapon’ ban is predicated on mostly cosmetic and inconsequential features, such as a pistol grip, flash suppressor, detachable magazine, and collapsing stock. It was alleged based upon specious logic that such features make the weapon more deadly.

Media reports are stating that  the rifles used in the attack were purchased by a friend Enrique Marquez. Police have not released any further details on how the weapons were acquired. They may have been solid in a private party transfer, using a gun dealer as California has banned private gun sales without going through a licensed dealer. Or, Marquez may have bought the weapons as a ‘straw purchase’ where they were intended for suspect Sayed Farook the whole time. Another option, most disconcerting to proponents of universal background checks, is that the law didn’t stop Marquez from illegally selling the weapons to Farook.

Media is also mistakenly describing the weapons as having been modified to be more powerful. An AR-15, like most rifles, is capable of penetrating soft police body armor, walls, and vehicles. Nothing was done to enhance the physical ‘punch’ of the weapons. Only modifications to the weapons functionality were made and illegal 10+ round magazines were used.

Under California law, if you took an AR-15 that was legal to possess in Nevada, removed the standard magazine release, and put one on there that needed a ‘tool’ to release it, such as the tip of a bullet, the weapon, though functionally identical to the prohibited ‘assault weapon’ would then be legal. Swapping out the bullet button for a proper magazine release takes about two minutes or less and requires no tools. At least one of the rifles was modified in attempt to make it fully automatic, but it was done improperly and it failed.

Law enforcement hasn’t said yet how the weapon was modified. AR-15 style rifles are distinctly different in semi-automatic and fully-automatic form. The conversion from semi-to-fully auto is not easy. Semi-auto ARs have a ‘denial hump’, or simply an area of the receiver that hasn’t been milled out. This is to deny the room needed for installing the auto-sear, which holds the hammer from hitting the firing pin and detonating the cartridge until the bolt is locked, preventing an explosion. The rifle would also need several different parts—a full-auto hammer and trigger disconnector, a three position safety catch, and a full-auto bolt—changed to function properly.

A “Lightning Link” could also have been made and installed. This is basically two pieces of metal which basically forces the semi-auto trigger to work in full-auto mode while delaying the stroke of the hammer as described as above. Truly modifying a weapon to be an illegal machine gun (under federal law) requires advanced gunsmithing and mechanical knowledge. Simpler solutions, like the SlideFire stock that moves the trigger finger to rapidly pull the trigger nearly as fast as full-auto fire, are already banned in California.

Another so-called modification was using 30 round ‘high capacity magazines’, which in reality are standard capacity. AR-15 designed Eugene Stoner’s original rife was designed to take 20 round magazines, increased to 30 rounds in 1969 for the M16 variant used in Vietnam. Supporters of restricting magazine capacity erroneously believe that ten round (or fewer) magazines will necessitate more frequent magazine changes. Sheriff Campbell of Boone County, Indiana, demonstrates how magazine capacity makes virtually no difference whatsoever in reloading speed, thus negating any alleged safety.