Progressives are sneaky weasels who smile at you while stabbing you in the back. They will stop at nothing to impose their idea of Socialist Utopia on people and that includes ignoring or shredding the Constitution. These people look at our rule of law as an impediment to them attaining their goal of complete domination over the populace.

Progressives come in all shapes and sizes and that means there are Republican as well as Democrat progressives. One only needs to look at the bills being pushed through Congress right now, bills that will designate the US as part of the battlefield and deny Americans their Constitutional protections, to see that both parties are working toward complete domination.

The Fast and Furious gun running scheme that was sanctioned by the Obama regime and had support from the White House through the Justice Department to the ATF is a classic example of how progressives work to remove our rights.

Fast and Furious was a scheme in which the ATF asked gun dealers to allow illegal purchases to be made so the guns could be tracked to drug cartels in Mexico. The gun dealers were not happy about this and continually asked for reassurance that they would not get in trouble and that the guns would not make it south of the border.

The dealers were assured that the government had things under control. We now know this is untrue as the ATF lost track of a large number of guns, two of which were found at the scene of the murder of a border patrol agent.

The Obama regime has denied involvement and documents obtained by CBS show that the regime was interested in using the illegal purchases (purchases that were allowed ONLY at the request of the regime) to enforce more stringent gun control measures.

That’s right. The Obama regime asked gun dealers to allow illegal purchases to go through AND THEN tried to use those purchases as a reason we need tougher reporting rules, tougher gun laws. If the ATF had not asked the gun dealers to allow the illegal purchases they would not have happened.

Create a crisis, address the crisis and then trample on our rights while shredding the Constitution.

Fast and Furious was a criminal act authorized by the Obama regime that was ostensibly to track guns to drug cartels but in reality was designed to create a situation where the regime could impose more gun control.

Who knows what would have happened if the criminals in the regime had not been caught?

Eric Holder needs to go. Obama needs to go. The head of the ATF needs to go. In fact, anyone involved in this at the management level needs to go.

They all need to go to jail…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The Socialists in the Obama regime (which is all of them) believe that no crisis should go to waste. They see something they can make into a crisis, manufacture the crisis, and then push through legislation that would otherwise not pass. If they can’t get the legislation Obama uses Executive Orders to push through what he wants. The history of this regime is one manufactured crisis after another.

Enter the latest crisis. The gun problem in the states that border Mexico. The people who live in those states have no problems and are law abiding citizens but there are guns making their way into Mexico. The drug cartels are using them and some of our border patrol agents have been killed by those guns.

The regime now wants, and Obama has enacted by Executive Order, new rules requiring the border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California to report the purchase of two or more of certain types of rifles by the same person in a five day period. I can’t see how the regime can require some states to follow certain rules that other states do not have to. It seems to me that this is a violation of the Constitution considering the rule is via an Executive Order and not legislation passed by Congress, you know like the Constitution requires.

The real problem with all this is the manufactured crisis. The gun problem with purchases ending up in Mexico is because of illegal activity by members of the regime. There is corruption very high up and a cover up is under way regarding a program called Fast and Furious. Departments of the federal government, under orders from people in the regime, had people purchase a boat load of guns and send them into Mexico where they ended up in the hands of the drug cartels. The reported goal was to track the guns and see where they went and how they got there blah, blah.

The real goal was to manufacture a crisis involving guns so the regime could react to that crisis. Obama knows that laws violating the Second Amendment have a tough time passing in Congress, particularly if Republicans control any portion of it, so he used an Executive Order to impose new rules. It will not be long before the rules get tougher and extend to other states. This regime has manufactured a crisis in which people were killed by the illegal actions of our government and now it wants to address the crisis to further stifle our rights.

The illegal guns, the purchase of which was sanctioned by the regime, were lost. They ended up being used to kill border patrol agents and now Obama has imposed rules to solve a problem that was manufactured through the illegal actions of his regime.

This cannot go unchallenged. Law abiding citizens should be able to buy as many rifles (or any other legal firearms) as they want without having Big Sis and the rest of the nanny state government prying into their business.

Here is an idea, close the damned border and we won’t have to worry about it.

As for those wishing to buy several firearms, just buy one rifle every six days. Then you won’t be reported.

Source:
The Blaze

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The funny thing about people who love gun control and continually ignore the Second Amendment is that while they do not want us to be able to protect ourselves they are always on board with having their own protection. We have seen several liberals who think that all guns are bad and that people should not be allowed to carry them only to have it revealed that they have permits and carry handguns. Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are two that come to mind. Then there are those like Rosie O’Donnell who don’t want to allow you protection but are wealthy enough to hire armed body guards.

The sleaziest among us are politicians who tell us how safe society is and that we do not need weapons of our own while they enjoy armed protection that we provide. The leaders in Congress have security details and the security for the president is out of this world. One might think that it is necessary and maybe so but why does a president need security in Chicago or in DC? These places have some of the most stringent gun control in the country and yet these people travel with armed men.

We all know why. Gun control does not work and when law abiding citizens are disarmed the only people who have guns are criminals (which makes those of us who can’t afford armed guards, prey).

The Governor of Maryland is one of these morons who says that all is fine and that we need tough gun control (read that as infringing on Second Amendment rights) because it makes society safer. He has a state police detail of about six armed officers who keep him safe.

We pay his salary and we pay for his protection. What makes him better than the rest of us?

The biggest hypocrite is Richard Daley, the recently retired Mayor of Chicago. This moron has been against gun ownership all his life and he has worked very hard to violate the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The unconstitutional gun laws in Chicago were struck down by the Supreme Court so Daley went to work and set up roadblocks that make it nearly impossible for a resident to get a gun much less carry it. There is no way anyone could call what Chicago does, reasonable.

Daley is retired** and get this. While he does not want the people of Chicago to keep and bear arms he wants an armed protection detail to look out for him. Daley wants a team of armed men paid for by the taxpayers to keep him safe while he has done everything in his power to keep the people of Chicago from being able to protect themselves. He has made them less safe while demanding they pay for his safety.

Now that is first class hypocrisy and it smacks of liberal elitism where this schmuck thinks he is better than the average guy (read this as those who pay his salary and for his protection) and that he deserves better protection than the people who actually pay the salaries of the police officers of the city.

Do you think any average citizen in Chicago could request and get an armed detail to provide a safe environment?

Not likely.

I think the people of Chicago should use whatever legal means are available to keep Daley from getting protection. He should be in the exact same position as everyone else.

He should be just as vulnerable as those whose Constitutional right he has violated.

Perhaps if these politicians were to get a dose of the real world they would wise up.

Perhaps not, especially liberals, but at least without armed protection he has the same chance of being murdered as the next guy.

That, after all, is a level playing field and we all know how much liberals think that all things should be fair and equal for everyone.

Until, of course, to comes to their lives. Then they like things tilted in their favor.

People of Chicago, just say NO.

** Daley leaves office on 17 May

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

It took about 2 months but Obama finally did what I knew he wanted to do all along. He finally started a discussion about more gun control in this country. I had figured he would start that dialog right after the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords but he waited. He did not want to let a crisis go to waste but he did not want to appear as if he was anxious to capitalize on the tragedy, which he certainly was.

Obama tells a whopper right off the bat when he claims that there was not a lot of finger pointing after the incident. This is revisionist history. In fewer than 2 hours after the shooting the left was blaming everyone it could think of. Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, talk radio, the Tea Party, you name it. The only person the left did not blame was the criminal who pulled the trigger. From all accounts, he was a left wing nut job…

I also think his numbers on children killed are way off but the truth is not his strong point.

Barack Obama wants common sense rules and thinks we should be doing a little more. He thinks it is awful that a nut like the Giffords shooter was able to get a gun. We need to do more, he says, to keep people who should not have guns from getting them. Everyone would agree with common sense rules, right?

We have 20,000 different gun laws on the books. We have states that violate the Second Amendment and this guy wants to make it tougher.

You see, the gun laws we have now were not the problem with regard to the Giffords shooting. The lack of law enforcement doing its job was the problem. The DEMOCRAT sheriff and his department had reports about the shooter and had dealings with him on a number of occasions. But since his mother worked for the local government he was left alone. Even though he frightened people at college and was not allowed back until he was evaluated, the DEMOCRAT sheriff did not do his job.

If the shooter had been picked up and held for a psychological evaluation then he could have been reported as a mental health concern and would not have been allowed to buy a gun. Let us not brush aside the fact that he bought his weapon legally because he was never picked up by the police.

All the laws in the world will not prevent this from happening if the DEMOCRAT sheriff refuses to enforce them.

PERIOD.

Ever notice how easy it is for a person (like Obama) who has thousands of armed people around him at all times to discuss how we need to have common sense rules to own or carry weapons?

I do not agree with his plan. Make all 50 states SHALL issue states and allow all law abiding citizens who want to carry guns to do so.

Keep criminals in jail, send the illegals back home and prevent those with mental illness from buying weapons. But do not impose stupidity on the rest of us because some mental case was ignored by the DEMOCRAT sheriff.

It was a tagedy Barack but the gun did not cause it. The moron who pulled the trigger did and he was enabled by the moron DEMOCRAT sheriff who was derelict in his duties.

Sources:
Brutally Honest
Yahoo News

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The Democrats do not like guns. Let me rephrase, liberals do not like guns in the hands of We The People. Some of them have armed guards and some have their own carry permits but they are not too keen on the rest of us having the ability to defend ourselves. Barack Obama is looking to introduce some kind of stricter gun laws but he avoided saying anything at the State of the Union because he did not want to appear as if he was trying to capitalize on the Tuscon shootings.

But that is what he will try to do. He and his gun grabbing friends (many of whom were upset he did not call for it in the SOTU) will try to make laws even more stringent and will try to infringe on our rights even more. They will claim that loopholes need to be closed to prevent people with mental disorders from getting guns.

The loophole that needs to be changed is the loophole in the office of the local sheriff in Tuscon. The gunman had many interactions with the law and gave a number of indications that he was mentally unstable but the local sheriff ignored all of that and allowed this unstable man to run free. A background check was done on him (contrary to claims from the left that background check is required on all regulated firearms) and since there was nothing negative, he was allowed to buy the gun. If the sheriff had taken the man into custody and had him undergo a psych evaluation (and he was diagnosed with a mental disorder) then he would have been in the database and unable to purchase the weapon.

The problem lies not in the laws but in the inept members of the sheriff’s department who did not do their jobs.

Not to mention that if he could not buy the gun legally he would have bought one illegally. A person who is determined to do harm will do harm and little things like the law will not get in the way. It is that simple.

We do not need more gun laws. We have about 20,000 of them now and they do not work because the criminals do not obey the law.

Gun control does not work because criminals will get guns. Gun control ONLY disarms honest, law abiding citizens and makes them prey for the criminal class.

But Obama and his gun grabbers do not care because they do not care about the Constitution, they do not care about our rights, and they want to disarm us so they can enslave us.

Obama has no use for guns but he has quite a large number of heavily armed people who can shoot any threat to him. He does not want you to have the same ability to protect yourself and your family.

So Obama will be looking to push more gun control and he will have lots of support from the gun grabbing left. Fortunately, the right is in charge of the House. But if he succeeds all he will do is make a bunch of law abiding citizens a criminal class because they will not turn over their guns.

I got an email from a friend with an essay entitled “The Gun Is Civilization (March 2007)”. It is widely attributed to Maj L. Caudill USMC but the actual author is Marko Kloos. (Big Dog salute to WT)

It is a well done piece that makes a lot of sense. Obama and his gun grabbing elities should read it.

In fact, most people would benefit from reading it.

Perhaps those in Congress who support our rights should read it into the record…

In any event, we will have a fight on our hands as the Obama freedom wrecking ball continues to smash away.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Chuck Schumer is not a supporter of the rights of Americans to keep and bear arms. He is in favor of more gun control and more restrictions on Americans in violation of our Constitutional right. But Chuckie is not completely against the Second Amendment. Chuck has a gun permit and carries one even though he is in a state where it is extremely tough to get any kind of carry permit. The kind of permit Chuckie has is nearly impossible to get.

Not only does Schumer carry a handgun, the New York City Police Department also provides armed escorts for the good senator. In fact, the Government Accounting Office — the investigative arm of the US Congress — slammed Schumer’s use of police resources for personal protection. It’s clear that Schumer believes he’s special. He wishes to ban private citizens’ ownership of firearms, while he enjoys layers of protection.

“No wonder Chuckie Schumer shoots his mouth off so much — he’s able to protect himself,” says a 25-year police veteran.

Also, a check of Pistol License records shows that Senator Schumer possesses an “unrestricted” pistol permit, a rarity in New York City. Licenses are distributed in different categories in the Big Apple: Target Permits allow only use of a firearm at a licensed firing range; Premises Permits allow weapons to be kept in a home or apartment; Restricted Permits allow the gunowner to carry their firearms concealed but only within the purview of their job (security, jewelers, armored car guards, etc.). So it’s evident that Senator Schumer has two sets of rules — one for Americans and one for himself. American Daily

Yes, Schumer is part of the political class that thinks he is more important than you. He thinks he deserves more protection than you so much so that he even has police officers who escort him. He can defend himself and he has an escort detail of police officers.

Most citizens I know do not want their own police officer and if the state of New York wants to pay cops to tag along with Chuckie then it is their business as long as it is only New York taxpayers footing the bill.

But what we do want is to be able to exercise our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The people of New York (and all of the states for that matter) deserve THE EXACT SAME carry permit that Chuckie was able to get. The people are his boss and if he can get a permit then they all should have one.

In fact, if we were to follow the Constitution (assuming that requiring permits is not a violation of it) then people should be issued permits unless there is some compelling reason not to allow an individual to carry.

Obviously Schumer feels that he has certain inalienable rights that the rest of us do not. He would like to disarm you while packing his own heat.

And this people, is why we need to get rid of all these pukes.

It is November or never.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

I am not sure exactly what this meeting is about but anytime liberals have meetings about guns it is not good. The Senate Judiciary Committee is having a meeting entitled “Firearms in Commerce: Assessing the Need for Reform in the Federal Regulatory Process” which is rather vague but when they talk about reform or a regulatory process it cannot be good.

The other concern is the word Commerce is mentioned. Given how Democrats think they can regulate anything by invoking the Commerce Clause it is not a stretch to assume they might be trying to regulate firearms through commerce in a more restrictive way.

We will need to be vigilant and ensure these gun grabbers are not trying to backdoor us before they are thrown to the curb.

We must always be on the lookout because they will never allow us to protect ourselves unless we force them to leave us alone.

This man defended his family and property with a legal AK 47 and he was arrested for firing warning shots into the ground. Why did he shoot? The place he lives has the shot detector technology and he knew if he fired the police would arrive quickly.

Why was it necessary? A gang was congregating and threatening him. If the gun grabbers get their way he would be at the mercy of the gangs.

Which is just about as bad as being at the mercy of the government and its willful disregard of our right to keep and bear arms.

November cannot come soon enough.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Mayor Daley is not happy with the decision by the Supreme Court that says the Second Amendment applies to the states. He is an anti gun politician and he wants guns banned. He has no concern for the Constitution or for freedom. He only cares about power and how to get rich through Chicago corruption.

The people of Chicago see things a bit differently. They are happy with the decision. Some indicate that they have weapons to protect themselves even though the weapons are illegal (by virtue of the gun ban). People are willing to break the law to ensure their safety.

Daley cares not one bit and he vowed to enact a new law that will make it extremely difficult to own a gun. These tactics usually involve undue barriers that prevent people, particularly the poor, from getting weapons. The very same tactics that liberals used after slavery to terrorize the freemen.

Why should Daley care? He has armed guards to protect him.

At least the people get it. As one person puts it:

Another neighbor, 50-year-old Charlene Figgins, thinks Chicago Mayor Richard Daley is living in a different Chicago than she is and that he doesn’t understand the citizens’ need for protection.

She says it can take 30 minutes for police to respond to calls for help in her neighborhood. She says the mayor doesn’t have that problem. Chicago Tribune

Or as the bumper sticker says, when seconds count the police are minutes away.

9-1-1, government sponsored dial a prayer…

Never surrender, never submit.

The fact that the Second Amendment is an individual right is indisputable except to lefties who have trouble understanding what the words “The People” and “shall not be infringed” mean. These are the same folks who refuse to believe in individual rights even though the Founders clearly stated such in their writings.

The issue changed to one of applicability to the states once the left lost its battle against individual rights. Then the issue became, well sure it applied in DC but that is not a state. It does not apply to the states.

The SCOTUS cleared that all up today with a decision that overturned a lower court ruling and remanded the issue back. The SCOTUS, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that the Second Amendment applies to the states and that is because of the Fourteenth Amendment. For a long time the Fourteenth was not considered to apply to the states but that changed a half century or so ago and decisions have been reached that made the Bill of Rights (with exceptions to some portions) apply to the states. This idea is what allowed abortion to become legal and forced the states to comply. If the rights spelled out in the Constitution did not apply to the states then the Court could not have ruled that abortion was legal because it would be a federal, and only a federal, issue. This ignore the fact that abortion is not a right and is indicated only because it is “settled” law where the right was somehow found.

The Second was never considered though thinking people knew that it was included in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth; “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” Which, as an aside, means the Arizona cannot violate Due Process since illegals are NOT citizens of the United States. But that is an issue for another time.

Interestingly but not surprising, gun grabbers are vowing to basically ignore the ruling issued today. Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago has vowed that his city will enact a new law soon that will prevent people from getting guns. This amounts to ignoring the law and is typical for Alinsky progressives. If the courts don’t rule your way then just ignore them. After all, this is what the Obama regime is doing with the drilling moratorium. They have vowed to ignore the court and issue a new moratorium.

How long will they do this before WE THE PEOPLE, decide to ignore the rules they come up with?

As for Daley, he is a first class slug and a hypocrite. While Daley does not believe that the people should be allowed to have guns, his aldermen are allowed to carry them. Richard Daley has about a dozen body guards on his detail and all of them are armed. Why is it that a person who works for the people of Chicago can have armed guards to protect him but will not allow the people to be armed to protect themselves.

No politician is any more important than the lowest in our society because even that person is the employer of the politician. I have little problem with presidents having armed security. Our enemies would love to attack a president and kill him. Other politicians are not that important and their demise would not cause turmoil in this country.

Think about it. If Richard Daley was killed by a would be criminal, would Chicago be in turmoil? No, they would replace him with another corrupt politician and keep on going. But Daley does not have to worry about that because he deems himself more important than the people who pay his salary. He is so against the people for whom he works that he will enact a law to keep people from getting guns because he knows better than our Founders, our Supreme Court and YOU.

Daley has no worries because his armed guards go with him even when he travels out of state. One of Daley’s armed guards caught an escaped criminal near the family vacation spot in Michigan while Hizzoner and the family were there. If you or I had been there we might well have been victims of the criminal.

I have a real problem with people like Daley, politicians who feel they are more important than the average folks and who deserve more protection. And the people are not even asking for taxpayer funded security. All we want is the ability to defend ourselves. This goes for people like Barack Obama who would love to ban guns and put more people in danger because average citizens are much more likely to be victims of crime than most politicians, particularly a president.

The Supreme Court put an end to the idea that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states today and it should be as sacrosanct to liberals as the issue of abortion. If it is settled law then let it be settled and let the people have their guns.

The opinion is a good read and in it Justice Scalia excoriates Justice Stevens as well he should. Stevens (and Breyer) ignore US history and the words of the Founders in their opinion and rely on the actions of other nations as well as their liberal views. Even though the facts are completely spelled out with historical references as to what keeping and bearing arms meant (and still means), these two ignored the facts and presented the progressive view. Justices should provide a legal view, not a political one.

How nice for the dress down of Stevens to be in the record for all time and to be issued on his last day on the Court. As Scalia put it (after destroying Stevens’ arguments):

In a vibrant democracy, usurpation should have to be accomplished in the dark. It is JUSTICE STEVENS’ approach, not the Court’s, that puts democracy in peril.

While today marks a victory for Americans and for freedom one thing is overshadowed. There are four Justices who voted against the Constitution and against the long history of this matter. They voted with the legacy of the Democrats in the south who made gun control laws that applied to blacks in order to control them.

These progressive liberals perpetuate that desire to enslave the citizenry in this nation. And this time they want to enslave all of us, regardless of color.

One last note. Any politician who is in favor of gun control and/or denies people the right to keep and bear arms should not be allowed to own or carry a gun and should NOT receive armed guards.

If you believe that there should be NO guns then there can be none for you. That goes for Obama, Daley and all the other hypocrites who think they are more important than we who employ them.

UPDATE: After the Heller decision Mayor Daley predicted all hell would break loose. That has not happened and gun crime in DC has dropped to pre gun ban levels.

Never surrender, never submit.

It has been reported that Obama adviser and actor Kal Penn (Kalpen Suresh Modi) was robbed at gunpoint in Washington DC near Dupont Circle sometime after midnight. Penn, who starred in House and the Harold and Kumar movies has obviously staged this to gain attention as he intends to leave DC and resume his acting career in a new Harold and Kumar Christmas movie.

Penn reports that the gunman got his wallet, cell phones, and other belongings but this must be fabricated.

Washington DC has a gun ban so a person with a gun could not have robbed him. Gun control laws, we are told, work so this could not have happened. If he wanted to be believed he should have left the part about the gun out. Everyone knows that people do not carry guns in DC. If they did Penn might have had a chance against the supposed gunman. Then again, maybe not. Liberals don’t carry guns, they negotiate…

Interestingly, there was a rally consisting of a bunch of gun owners who showed up near DC (in Virginia where carrying guns is legal) and despite all those loaded weapons and “angry” people, not a single shot was fired.

Penn is obviously well off so if this happened maybe he should not look at it as a robbery. He should look at it as the manifestation of his political beliefs. It was redistribution of wealth. The person who allegedly robbed him had less money so he just leveled the playing field.

The only difference between what happened to Penn and what happens to the rest of us is that the IRS does not use guns to steal our money and they do it in broad daylight.

Source:
Yahoo News

Never surrender, never submit.