Feb 13, 2014 Second Amendment
The Ninth Circuit Court (of all courts) recognized the Second Amendment as applying to carrying (bearing) a firearm outside the home. The case was from San Diego County where people have to show a good reason to get a concealed carry permit (like in Maryland). The Court stated that a review of the history of the nation found ample evidence that supports the right to carry a firearm outside the home.
The Court specifically stated that a state does not have to grant a permit for concealed carry for self defense but elaborated to say that the Second Amendment does require the states to allow some form of carry outside the home.
If a state does not allow concealed carry then it must, by default, allow open carry.
I am sure this is not over because the gun grabbers will continue to fight. But if a fairly liberal Court has looked at our history and affirmed the right to carry a firearm outside the home then it will be up to the Supreme Court to decide any case that is brought regarding this issue. There are several Circuit Courts that have ruled the other way so the SCOTUS will have to decide this one.
Maryland requires a good and substantial reason to get a concealed carry permit and does not allow open carry. The law does not say what a good and substantial reason is but the Maryland State Police, who decide on permits, has determined that people need to carry valuables as part of a business or have documented threats (through police reports). Showing the dangerous environment in the state and stating the permit is for self defense will not get it approved.
With this ruling Maryland will be pressed by pro firearm groups to approve concealed carry permits or allow open carry.
The Ninth made it clear that law abiding citizens have a Constitutionally protected right to carry a firearm outside the home.
Now it will be up to states like Maryland to decide if they want that to be open carry or concealed carry.
This is a big win from an unexpected place.
It would, I might add, be refreshing if all the courts looked at history and what the people who wrote the Second Amendment actually said on the subject. There would be no doubt that the right to keep and bear arms (in or out of the home) is all encompassing and not subject to the whim of some political entity.
I will not hold my breath waiting for the anti Constitutional politicians in Maryland to change the law. They will only do so when pushed by the legal system.
And even then there is no guarantee the state will follow the law…
Keep in mind that gun grabbers only dislike firearms if YOU have them. They have no problems if they decide to own or carry a firearm or to be protected by people with them. If you are part of the political elite you can break the law and then get a waiver or permit when your lawbreaking is discovered.
Never surrender, never submit.
Feb 3, 2014 Second Amendment
Philip Seymour Hoffman died this week at the age of 46 from a heroin overdose. Hoffman was a pretty good actor and had all that life could offer and yet he died with a needle in his arm.
Hoffman was in favor of gun control and narrated an animated ad for the Nanny Bloomberg gun control group. Hoffman (like all other gun control [read anti Constitutional] nuts) believed that gun control would stop deaths due to firearm use. Gun control nuts want people to think banning guns will stop crime. The reality is these people only want to control our lives and remove the means we have to defend against the tyranny of government.
But banning things does not keep people who don’t obey the law from getting them. Maryland enacted very strict (unconstitutional) gun laws and people are getting shot right and left. Of course the gun grabbers will use this as an excuse to enact even tougher gun laws. But this will not work.
Hoffman is the case study of why it won’t. It is illegal to buy, sell, use or possess heroin but Hoffman was able to buy it, possess it and use it. Heroin has no medical use so it is absolutely illegal but Hoffman managed to get enough to kill himself and have about 50 bags leftover.
How is it that a man who broke the law to obtain the illegal drugs that took his life was ever in a position to dictate whether law abiding citizens should have guns? Was it his drug addled mind that prevented him from seeing the irony of pushing gun control laws as a means to prevent people from obtaining guns as he was obtaining the illegal substance heroin?
According to experts heroin use is a public health crisis. The drug has caused havoc in families across this nation and it IS ILLEGAL! Banning it (by making it illegal) does not keep people from getting and using it so how will any law banning (or otherwise making gun possession nearly impossible) guns keep bad people from using them to do harm?
The evidence is clear that it won’t. In all the cities where there are strict gun control laws there are large numbers of crimes where guns were used. Chicago, Baltimore, DC and countless other liberal controlled cities are living (or should I say dying) examples of why gun control does not work.
Liberals are always telling us that the war on drugs is a failure and since people are going to use drugs we should make them legal. In the same breath they tell us to ban guns to make society safer. The reality is that banning guns will not make society safer.
Perhaps Hoffman should have worked on ending illegal drug use in this country instead of helping to infringe on our rights.
His needle has killed more people than my guns…
Never surrender, never submit.
During the State of The Union Address last night Imperial Leader B. Hussein Obama misstated the truth, fudged figures and told outright lies. He pulled out some of the old plays in trying to appeal to Americans who can either trust Obama or what their eyes see. On the subject of Obamacare he had this to say:
I don’t expect to convince my Republican friends on the merits of this law,” he said. “But I know that the American people aren’t interested in refighting old battles… Politico
Obama wants us to believe that a new law that is just being implemented is an old battle and he wants us to believe that Americans don’t want us to fight the battle. The reality is that nearly 65% of Americans do not like the law, millions have been dropped out of perfectly good insurance, millions more have been added to Medicaid and the law is costing way more than advertised. It is also true that Obama lied about the number of people signing up and that many of those who have enrolled are the ones who had their insurance cancelled because of the law. Couple this with the fact that few of the young are signing up and it is easy to see that disaster is looming.
We can beat the Obamacare horse to death but Obama and his toadies will keep pushing it. The only way to let them know how we feel is to get rid of every politician who voted for it.
But something else was quite interesting in the Obama lie fest last night. While Obama was telling members of Congress and the American people that he is an Imperial Leader who will legislate via his pen and Executive Orders he mentioned gun control. He plans on doing what he wants via EO and against the Constitution.
Citizenship means standing up for the lives that gun violence steals from us each day. I have seen the courage of parents, students, pastors, and police officers all over this country who say “we are not afraid,” and I intend to keep trying, with or without Congress, to help stop more tragedies from visiting innocent Americans in our movie theaters, shopping malls, or schools like Sandy Hook. Guns Save Lives
If Barack Obama truly believes that Americans do not want to fight old battles then he should give up his fight to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms. That battle was fought and settled a little over 222 years ago (15 December 1791) when the Second Amendment was adopted as part of the Bill of Rights (the Bill of INDIVIDUAL Rights). That certainly qualifies as an old battle. A battle which was not only won but resulted in a right protected by inclusion in our Constitution which, as the alleged Constitutional Law professor should know, is the Supreme Law of the Land.
Obama wants you to believe that a four year old law that is still being implemented is old news, an old battle that Americans do not want to fight. At the same time he expects you to believe that firearms ownership is some new thing and that the battle over it must be fought. I have to believe that Obama knows better but he is a socialist and he knows that an armed society is a free society and he cannot tolerate freedom for the serfs. He can’t get away with imposing his will on us if we are able to resist the tyranny. He needs to make it as tough as possible (he would prefer total disarming) because he needs to be able to CONTROL us. Gun control is not about guns, it is about control.
No Executive order and no law will stop gun related violence because people who use guns to commit violence DO NOT OBEY THE LAW. If banning something or making it harder to get worked then we would not have a problem with people using heroin in this country.
Obama makes that case himself without even realizing it. In the quote above he said that things needed to be done to stop more tragedies in movie theaters, shopping malls and schools. ALL of the places he mentioned are gun free zones. People are not allowed BY LAW to have guns there.
If gun control laws worked then no shootings would take place at these places BUT BAD GUYS DO NOT FOLLOW THE LAW.
In fact, these kinds of laws make it easier for criminals because they know that only law abiding people will follow the law and that there will be no armed opposition. You know I am right on this and you know that Obama is wrong.
Obama’s hometown of Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation and people get shot there all the time. Maryland enacted tough gun laws last year and one person a day has been shot in Baltimore since the first of the year.
Gun control does not work and we will not stand for it.
We settled that issue 222 years ago after fighting the tyranny of our overlords.
That battle is old and the issue is settled. The last thing Obama wants or needs is to start a new battle on this issue.
There are far too many armed citizens who will do what Obama and most other politicians refuse to do.
PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.
Never surrender, never submit.
Jan 23, 2014 Second Amendment
This song is to the point and it asks the question; “Who the hell gave you the right to take my guns from me?” In America the Second Amendment is there to protect a preexisting right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. It is not about the military (addressed elsewhere in the Constitution) and it is not about hunting (not addressed at all). The reality is the Founders fought a bloody war against the ruling nation to gain independence. That ruling nation was oppressive and even tried to take away firearms, an act that was not well received.
We fought to gain our freedom and now we must continue to fight to protect our freedom. Ronald Reagan said Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.
That generation is now and we are in real danger of losing freedom (much of it has been lost already). Listen to the song and think about the law abiding who do no wrong and would never use a firearm to hurt someone without just cause. And then think of criminals who do not obey the law and ask yourself if any gun law will stop them.
You know the answer.
Well, who the hell gave you the right?
Never surrender, never submit.
Jan 17, 2014 Second Amendment
Some food for though; Rambo movies did not stop violence and neither do any others where guns are used…
Harvey Weinstein will make a show that he promises will destroy the National Rifle Association. No real details on the film but it is not going to be a documentary. It will probably be something like the Al Gore global warming crap that tries to indoctrinate people into a different reality. You know, all guns are bad and people don’t need them.
Use these kinds of propaganda and some folks will be influenced. There are plenty of people who recite things based on some movie or story as fact while ignoring the reality of the situation. The faked moon landing conspiracy comes to mind.
I doubt Weinstein will be able to influence the debate as there are far too many gun owners who know that more guns equals less crime. That has been proven time and again but the left, and morons like Weinstein, think that guns are the problem.
Let me reiterate; more guns equals less crime.
As Al Gore might say, the science is settled.
Weinstein has made it clear that he does not think there should be any guns in this country except for the guns in the hands of the government. I saw a movie once about a place where the only people with guns were government and soldiers. The movie was Schindler’s List.
One would think that a Jewish guy would be wary of government confiscating firearms from its citizens considering what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany but Weinstein seems to live in the world he creates in movies. Emily Miller points out in her article that Weinstein must have watched too many of his own movies if he thinks a fully loaded gun will just pop up when he needs it.
I am willing to bet the film will do nothing to hurt the NRA.
In fact, I bet they get even more members.
I also think that we should ban guns in all movies. We should make it illegal for Hollywood and the rest to possess prop guns and there should be a fine if a gun is used or displayed in a movie. Hell, if, as Weinstein says, we do not need guns in society then we do not need guns in movies in society…
Never surrender, never submit.