Missouri Politicians Set Stage for Gun Confiscation

Police confiscate guns

Zachary Cole

TyrannyWatch.org

February 16, 2013

Recently it seems Missouri politicians have been willing to tackle some very tough but important issues within legislation. Although not perfect, we have bills that attempt to resist the NDAA and warrantless spying by drones on the state level. But with every small victory or progress comes with them more concerns about the condition of our civil rights. One more controversy that we have to keep a close eye on is the legislation sponsored by Rep. Rory Ellinger called HB 545.

Ellinger, along with his cosponsors Representatives Schupp, McNeil, and Walton Gray, have presented an amendment to Chapter 571 of the RSMo. HB 545 essentially puts a ban on “assault weapons” which is not a surprise but their definition of such weapons is even more concerning. This bill doesn’t simply want to ban “assault rifles” like an AR-15, its language clearly includes shotguns and handguns that are able to accept a magazine of more than 10 rounds.

To make matters worse, the bill also does not allow for any “assault weapons” acquired before it becomes law to be grandfathered in. The only solutions it gives are for the owner to remove their gun and high capacity magazines out of state, render the weapon inoperable, or turn the firearm over to the police. Legislation also gives such owners 90 days from the effective date to do one of the three options before they would be in violation of the law. Did I forget to mention that it has a felony charge attached to it?

While the Democrats are certainly the source for such a ridiculous bill, we should not assume that the Republicans are going to come out strong against this legislation. Although House Speaker Tim Jones says he’s committed to protecting the Second Amendment we must hold both parties feet to the fire. The NRA came out recently under their Institute for Legislative Action and said, “Compelling law-abiding citizens to surrender their firearms and magazines is unconstitutional, wrong and another failed attempt to reduce crime… HB 545 would only affect the lawful, while ignoring the actual problem of violent criminals who misuse firearms.”

Of course, there are others that are skeptical about the implementation of this bill. The questions arise as to who would actually follow one of the three steps and would local law enforcement confiscate guns if further action was needed. The answer to both questions is quite simple and stems from a similar logic. People who follow the solutions of HB 545 will be law-abiding citizens who in their naivety think the government knows best. While police officers, in reaction to civil disobedience, will probably go along with an Executive Order by Gov. Jay Nixon or Pres. Obama to quell dissent. However, I do realize that many police officers and even military have stated that they will not go door-to-door confiscation of guns. Let’s just hope that philosophy holds strong when the threat of losing their job or imprisonment becomes a reality.

It is my belief that it is our responsibility to make sure those who supposedly represent us submit to our will. It is also my opinion that we as a society cannot fully depend on public servants to protect us or even resist larger institutions. That is our job. With that being said, I want to challenge local grassroots efforts to focus in on HB 545. The best thing you can do right now without leaving your residence is call the office of Gov. Jay Nixon (573-751-3222) and tell him to renounce this bill. Apparently, according to his secretary, they are keeping count of whether or not the public is for this legislation.

Most importantly, as a concerned citizen, I ask that you also contact your State Representative at573-751-2000 and tell them to reject HB 545 or any new gun control legislation. If you do not know who your State Representative is please click here and look them up by district. Furthermore, as a measure of chastisement, I ask that you contact the sponsor and cosponsors of this bill.

State to them your disapproval of HB 545 and tell them to discontinue any efforts for further restrictions or gun bans. It is important that you are respectful and do not make any violent threats because the latter only hurts our credibility. A final note for any activists that are interested in making calls or sending emails but live out of state, you are also welcome to contact our Missouri State Representatives and express your disgust. There is no need to tell them what state you’re from and it is encouraged not to tell them. For those that are interested in getting out and making your presence known I suggest going down to Jefferson City, MO at the Capitol building, in an organized way, and stage a protest or demonstration.

Obama’s 23 Executive Orders, Don’t be Fooled

Zachary Cole

TyrannyWatch.org

January 18, 2013

After weeks of threats and esoteric statements about the Obama administration’s Gun Control Committee, the president finally revealed what exactly he plans to do. As promised, Obama issued 23 sweeping executive actions everything from mental health to “gun safety” (which by the way is a term that will be inserted wherever it’s beneficial to the government). Not surprisingly, are the glaring absence of assault weapons and high-capacity magazine bans.

Were all the pro-gun lobbyists wrong? No. In fact, the Obama administration plans to push legislation through Congress. It doesn’t seem that Obama is quite as bold on this issue as he has been on health care and illegal immigration. This is the same president that said in 2010, “So I’ll order an Executive Order, that will allow us to go forward. Because I refuse to pass this problem to another generation of Americans.” Another statement of his in 2011, “I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own.  Believe me, right now dealing with Congress the idea… But believe me the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting.”

The above quotes from the president are very telling. Everything from his body language and facial expressions indicate that if he could get away with it, he would and indeed he did on other issues. The latter quote, in the middle of his statement he pauses, while the crowd of sycophants chant, “Yes we can”. Obviously our public school system has failed to transmit to the citizenry what exactly are the functions of the Executive branch. However, what is even more pathetic is the lack of care or knowledge concerning what historically an Executive Order is for. Clearly these actions put forth by the early presidents were only to help in the administration of the Executive branch and not a way to bypass the Legislative or Judicial branches.

The best guess I can make as to why the authoritarians didn’t go for broke is at least due in part to millions of citizens rushing to buy guns declaring a line in the sand concerning the Second Amendment. Another reason why they may have gotten cold feet could be all the calls for the commencement of a second American Revolutionary War. Anybody who does a small bit of research on the events leading up to 1776 will see the obvious correlation between the infringement of the right to bear arms and the rebellion against the British Empire.

Although the Obama administration did not ban anything through executive fiat, they did raise concerns about civil rights violations, profiling, creating a professional “snitch” culture, and the expansion of a nanny state. Below I have listed the 23 executive orders, they are as follows:

1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.

4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.

11. Nominate an ATF director.

12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.

13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.

14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.

22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

In the near future I hope to give a more thorough breakdown of the executive orders. I also look forward to seeing how the Obama administration implements these actions in light of public resistance. But who knows, there are a lot of spineless activists these days that talk a good game but have no action when it counts.

Continuing on, as I understand the actions:

Order numbers 8, 12, 13, 15, 18, and 19 all deal with safety measures and federal intervention within the public school system.

Order numbers 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 11 all deal with the ATF, FBI, law enforcement, and how they regulate private and commercial purchases of firearms. It also touches on guns that are formally seized and has the potential of creating a no buy list.

Order numbers 7 and 23 seem to indicate an implementation of anti-gun and mental health campaigns aimed to propagate the government’s view on these issues.

Order numbers 2, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, and 22 all focus on mental health issues and the creation of professional snitches.

Already there are people in the Legislative branch that are ready to resist Obama’s executive orders by nullifying them with a bill. Sen. Rand Paul came out recently and said, “In this bill we will nullify anything the president does that smacks of legislation…And there are several of the executive orders that appear as if he’s writing new law. That cannot happen.” Furthermore he states, “I’m afraid that Pres. Obama may have this ‘king complex’ sort of developing, and we’re going to make sure it doesn’t happen…” If that wasn’t clear enough, Sen. Paul said during an interview for CBN, “I’m against having a king. I think having a monarch is what we fought the American Revolution over and someone who wants to bypass the Congress… That’s someone who wants to act like a king or a monarch.”

Hopefully as this issue develops, people who are standing strong now will continue to stand as political pressure mounts. We cannot let a bunch of hen pecking authoritarians drown out our voices or some ninnying yuppie publications like Esquire magazine persuade us to give up 1 inch by their sarcastic satire. Neither can we give in against the political theater of politicians surrounding themselves with children to evoke emotional responses that lack any logical thought. Let us pay close attention to every word and deed of these people because this is a treacherous time.

Illinois: CC Legal, Let’s Ban the Guns

Authoritarians want to make Illinois a "gun-free zone"

Authoritarians want to make Illinois a “gun-free zone”

Zachary Cole

TyrannyWatch.org

January 5, 2013

UPDATE:  Due to the current nature of Illinois politics, some facts may change as we receive more details.

As recently as three weeks ago, the 7th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Illinois ban on concealed carry was unconstitutional and the legalization was long overdue. According to Judge Richard Posner, “There is no suggestion that some unique characteristic of criminal activity in Illinois justifies the state taking a different approach from the other 49 states.”

Posner continues, “If the Illinois approach was demonstrably superior, one would expect at least one or two other states to have emulated it.” The federal court gave 180 days for lawmakers to create a bill that would legalize open carry in the state. This seemed to be a major victory for all gun rights advocates in Illinois but with recent developments in gun control laws, it appears to be hollow.

Within this last week Democratic Senate leader John Cullerton submitted HB 815 amendment 1 & 2 and HB 1263 amendments 5 & 6, which would essentially ban most semiautomatic handguns, rifles, and shotguns (including pump rifles and shotguns), ammunition magazines that hold 10 rounds or more, require registration with Illinois State police, and most likely close down gun ranges and clubs.

Apparently there is some opposition, State Sen. Dale Righter stated, “I will not support any legislation…That requires anyone in Illinois to register their firearms with state government.” The amendments did pass through the Illinois Senate Public Health Committee last night but failed to get the 30 votes required in the Illinois Senate. As a result Cullerton postponed the floor votes until later this week.

But don’t worry there is no rest for the wicked. From Sunday to Tuesday a lame-duck session convenes, where Gov. Patrick Quinn and Mayor Rahm Emanuel plan to focus on the House of Representatives to achieve their anti-gun agenda. To make matters worse Rep. Edward Acevedo just filed an amendment to Senate Bill 2899, which is very similar in language to Cullerton’s proposed amendments.

Although time is running short we still have an opportunity to send the gun grabbers home with their tails tucked between her legs. The easiest thing an activist can do is call your State Representative ASAP and express your opposition to Senate Bill 2899. Tell them any legislation that bans firearms, magazines, and registers law-abiding citizens with the state police is unacceptable and will result in them applying for unemployment when they come up for reelection. The main number for the Illinois General Assembly is 217-782-2000 or you can find your state legislator at: http://www.ilga.gov

It is time to stand strong for the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. The road to disarmament is paved incrementally and created through apathy. We must not sit idly by as gun grabbers try to inundate us domestically from all sides with new amendments and bills. All the while they are securing their agenda internationally by trying by March to sneak the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty in any way they can. To all the detractors who think we are crazy, maybe they should observe the co-author of the Second Amendment’s words when he said, “To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” This is of course what the authoritarian’s want, so why would we give them the power they crave?

Media Targets Gun Owners Like Sex Offenders

Treating legal gun owners as sex offenders

Treating legal gun owners as sex offenders

Zachary Cole

TyrannyWatch.org

January 3, 2013

In a further effort to demonize legal gun owners who have already been put into a database and registered, the mainstream media has took it upon themselves to out these “dangerous” people.

Through FIOA requests the Herald Times, the Journal News, and a host of other online media have made it their business to construct through Google maps an interactive list of gun owners in their local areas. These maps, when one clicks on a dot, displays the person’s name and address. They cite State law (such as in New York) which says, “There is no right to privacy regarding handgun ownership.” Never mind the fact that these law-abiding citizens are being treated no better than a pedophile or a rapist. Guilty of nothing more than wanting to protect their families, target practice, or occasionally go hunting.

Continuing on, the Journal News states, “Data for all permit categories, unrestricted carry, premises, business, employment, target and hunting, is included, but permit information is not available on an individual basis.” They go on to state in their Frequently Asked Questions section that “New York law does not require a permit to own a long gun such as a rifle or shotgun.” The Journal News on their “Gun Owners Map” page explains why they have created such a resource and act as though they are concerned journalists doing a public service.

In reality their motives seem to be more sinister and are actually proven through a glaring contradiction on the very same page. When one asks: Why are they targeting handgun owners if assault weapons are the focus? Is it simply because by law they could not get the information on people who own rifles? Or is it they are massaging the public’s consciousness for the banning of all guns. After all, Pres. Obama, Eric Holder, Rahm Emanuel, and Sen. Feinstein have all suggested a complete ban on semi automatics such as handguns too.

It is apparent that the map was created in light of recent events such as the Sandy Hook massacre. It is also clear that the media outlets that are participating in such activities are following the lead of gun grabbers like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who wants a total assault weapons ban. It would seem that this is just another pathetic attempt to discredit personal ownership of firearms and generate the talking point that banning assault rifles will not be good enough.

This indeed is what politicians like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is calling for. He suggested Obama use an “executive action” concerning new aggressive gun laws. Whatever the case may be the mentality of these people can be summed up in one quote by former Attorney General Janet Reno who said, “Waiting periods are only a step. Registration it is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.” I shudder to think that a majority of people would go along with such a thing. But it appears we may see the day soon when those that uphold the Second Amendment will also have to wear a modern version of the Scarlet letter.

Gun Control: Rooted in Racism

KKK 1

Zachary Cole

TyrannyWatch.org

When listening to the arguments of the gun grabbers you always have to separate the facts from the emotionalism. Take for instance the history of gun control in America and its racist roots. It is a fact that the first gun control lobbyists were the Klu Klux Klan wanting to keep firearms out of the hands of African-Americans. It should also be duly noted that the KKK were also Democratic operatives and so it should be no surprise that in 2012 the same party that wanted to disarm Blacks in the past, now want to try for it again on the general population. For those interested in information regarding the KKK being the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party, read “A Short History of Reconstruction” by Dr. Eric Foner who is the DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University.

Although some may scoff at this, even liberal minded people such as Adam Winkler, a UCLA professor, while researching his book “Gunfight” said, “It was a constant pressure among white racist to keep guns out of hands of African-Americans, because they would rise up and revolt. The KKK began as a gun control organization. Before the Civil War, blacks were never allowed to own guns. During the Civil War, black owned guns for the first time – either they served in the Union Army and they were allowed to keep guns, or they buy guns on the open market where for the first time there’s hundreds of thousands of guns flooding the marketplace after the war. So they arm up because they know who they’re really dealing with in the South.”

By a historical perspective, it is apparent that the Second Amendment and the 13th Amendment are inseparable. In a British tract from 1774 called “Political Disquisitions”, it poignantly states, “The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave.” Interestingly enough, this very idea was feared by Chief Justice Taney during his decision in the Dred Scott Case here in Missouri. Taney said, “For if they [Blacks] were so received, and entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens… It would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”

I am willing to bet that the trendy hipster-types on the left have never even took the time to research the history of gun control and it’s correlation with racism. Of course, gun control has an even darker history if one delves into the subject of disarmament and democide. Many oppressive systems and wicked dictators have disarmed their people, take for instance Mao Zedong. He wrote, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Since many in the Democratic Party seem to admire Mao, even to the point of possibly being labeled a Maoist, we may have to forget about the idea of one being innocently ignorant. We may have to consider and settle on the fact that these people know what they’re doing and are out-of-control authoritarians.

This foolishness is not only coming from the establishment but is also coming from self proclaimed revolutionaries. When I encountered this for the first time I was a little surprised. I totally agree with the idea of being peaceful and having a revolution of ideas but what will happen when ideas are not enough? What will happen when an oppressive system becomes a hot tyranny? I just don’t see how one can be a revolutionary and also side with the gun grabbers. What will your defense be then? Will you pathetically use self-immolation such as the Buddhist monk Thich Quang Duc in protest? Or shall you stupidly stand in front of the tanks like the “unknown rebel” at Tiananmen and hope to have a better result?

No, none of these bold acts of self-sacrifice change the policies of the government that they wished to achieve. However, these people became icons for the struggle of free humanity. We must not engage in activist fairytales that fantasize about a band of ragtag rebels that takedown a huge system with a simple act of civil disobedience. One may be able to cite a few instances where a handful of people have successfully changed a bleak situation. But when we go down the corridors of history, we see in order to change an oppressive system it took a semi coordinated effort to get the results they wanted (and it wasn’t a group of two or three people tying themselves to a tree that made a difference).

The answer to all of this is the natural right to be able to defend yourself. Most of us in our lifetime will never have to do anything drastic that would require bloodshed. But those that want to keep us in line with their idea of governance will always resort to coercion and violence to achieve their goal for total world dominance. We should look at the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms as a defensive measure and not an offensive one. We should truly put into perspective the act of gun control for what it really is: Racist ordinances that have been repackaged for the enslavement of the general population and the assurance of power for an illegitimate ruling class. What side of history will you be on? Will you side with the gun grabbers hiding behind their false brand of liberalism? Or will you side with the people, who will resist the laws rooted in racism and class warfare?

Feinstein’s Anti-Gun Witch Hunt

1500_bushmaster

Zachary Cole

Tyranny watch.org

December 28, 2012

The last couple years have been a major milestone in the process of disarming the public. The attack on the Second Amendment has come directly from the US government through the operation of Fast and Furious; the UN Arms Trade Treaty, and the unfortunate opportunism through the mass shootings of Aurora and Newtown that have occurred in the latter part of 2012.

Of course this has not been without a political circus that the Obama administration has not taken advantage of. After all Rahm Emanuel said, “We can’t let a crisis go to waste.” (Hilary Clinton said similar things as well.) We have even seen the false left-right paradigm exposed in recent shootings because of the hand-in-hand approach that the Democrats and Republicans have displayed on national television. While posing as different, they have actually come out and truly shown their colors. This only proves once again that they are behind the scenes working on similar goals. While publically entertaining the masses with their disagreements on secondary issues.

We have crazies like Rep. Donna Edwards from Maryland who said, “The Second Amendment is important…But we gotta get the guns.” We also have retiring Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas say, “It’s the semiautomatics and those large magazines that can be fired off very quickly. I think that does need to be looked at.” Thankfully Hutchison will not be able to vote for any upcoming assault weapons ban bill this year.

Fast-forward to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, who is set to introduce a bill on the first day of Congress that will officially ban assault weapons. She has been quoted as saying, “Who needs these military style assault weapons? Who needs an ammunition feeding device capable of holding 100 rounds?” Concerning the specifics of the bill, last Sunday on Meet the Press she said, “It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and possession, not retroactively, but prospectively, and ban the sale of clips of more than 10 bullets…The purpose of this bill is to get…weapons of war off the streets.”

What Feinstein and her legislation failed to clarify is that although people who already possess assault weapons that are targeted within this bill would be grandfathered in, it actually requires the same citizens to register their guns, provide a photo ID of them, and submit their fingerprints. This would not only eliminate the private sell of guns but would also create a potential list of “threats” to the federal government. This is not unlike the suggestion last week of some, that people on prescription drugs for mental illness should be registered. This can only lead to pre-crime measures and certainly tighter profiling on American citizens (which most civil rights activists have been against concerning race).

By the way, Sen. Feinstein is the same politician that presented an updated amendment for the NDAA that fooled a lot of people into believing that the indefinite detention measure have been corrected and would finally put to bed the issue of American citizens being disappeared without a trial or jury. Of course, this was far from the truth and certainly this assault weapons bill will have the legalese the federal government needs to incrementally ban all guns.

To go back to what Feinstein said, I will attempt to answer her questions according to what the founders of the Constitution actually meant by the Second Amendment. First and foremost, the Second Amendment was not for hunting. In fact, it wasn’t really even for defending yourself against common criminals. The founders expressly said that it was for defending the US citizens against tyrants in the federal government. It was for our defense militarily against a tyrannical system. Even Thomas Jefferson, no matter what you thought of him in his personal life, spoke of the dangers of becoming comfortable in our freedoms because if we did not have a revolution every few decades we can almost guarantee our enslavement.

Why do US citizens need “military style assault weapons”? It is because we need similar or equal power to defend ourselves against an out-of-control government and/or police state. Who needs “ammunition feeding device capable holding 100 rounds”? It is the general public that still believes in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is the average citizen that still believes in the validity of the Declaration of Independence. For the federal government is not our rulers but we are theirs and according to those that founded this form of governance, it is also our right to remove the corruption at any time.

As Barack Obama and the treasonous Gun Control Committee convene in this next month, let us all turn up the heat on those that seek to steal our rights. Call your local congressperson or your senators and tell them that they are politically done if they seek to put more restrictions on our Second Amendment rights. Assemble other people in your area that are pro-Second Amendment that would be willing to go to your State Capital or local federal buildings and have lawful pro-gun assemblies. Create a committee that would be willing to put together a pro-gun rally in which people could speak on the facts of gun free zones, violent crime statistics, and the historical dangers of disarming the public and its correlation to democide.

The time is now to get serious about our rights or slowly but surely they will be decimated. It’s easier to incrementally take away our right than it is to take large swaths of freedoms away. We only have to look at the patriot act and all the draconian legislation that has been passed since 9/11 to get an idea of what the future of the Second Amendment will be like. But if you like the direction in which this country is going, then let the words of Samuel Adams be the voice of reason to your descendents, “If you love wealth more than liberties, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”