The People of the State of California v. Tony Diaz. Diaz was busted for carrying an unregistered handgun without a license. The court cited Bruen and tossed the charges. The state is allowed to file an amended complaint, and — it being California — I assume they will.
At the time of defendant’s arrest California provided one legal means by which an individual could exercise their right to public carry- to get a license under section 26150. That path was unconstitutional. According to Shuttlesworth, faced with an unconstitutional restriction on his constitutional right, defendant was free to engage “with impunity in the exercise of the right. .. ”
The Court does not relish the conclusion reached here and understands its ramifications. But this result cannot be avoided in light of Bruen and Shuttlesworth and the arguments presented by the parties.
The demurrer is SUSTAINED. The People may attempt to remedy the complaint by filing an amended complaint within ten calendar days of the issuance of this order.(§ 1007.) If an amended complaint is not timely filed, the case will be dismissed.
When even California has to take note, we’ve started down the path to freedom again.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
I ran across an opinion column advocating for a ban of semiautomatic weapons — all of them; not just “assault weapons” — that raised the usual bogus points: The Second Amendment is not an individual right, the National Guard is the militia, no defensive usefulness, and so on.
I could address so many points in that column, but one truly stands above the others.
Why all semi-automatic weapons must be banned on a national basis
“The Constitution expressly allows Congress the right and authority to dictate the jurisdiction of the federal courts. To make sure the will of a majority of U.S. citizens are implemented, Congress could remove from the jurisdiction of the federal courts the ability to rule on the constitutionality of a ban of semi-automatic weapons (similar to the removal of jurisdiction over habeas corpus during the Civil War).”
The author, Bob Reid, is, according to the mini-bio, an attorney who has practiced for 46 years, working on “both state and federal constitutional issues.” That makes his bizarre claim even more incomprehensible.
I have studied the Constitution for decades but that provision still eludes me.
Article III, Section 1. “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court…”
Section 2. “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution…” (emphasis added)
That would appear to assign jurisdiction over determinations of constitutionality to the courts. As for the suspension of habeas corpus as a pseudo-precedent for limiting the power of the Supreme Court, specifically delegated to the Courts by the Constitution…
Article I, Section 9 “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public Safety may require it.” (emphasis added)
Is Reid seriously proposing that Congress declare war (Article I, Section 8, Clause 11) on the people of the United States, as a means of suspending the Constitution?
And, frankly, citing Lincoln’s abuses of that suspension to imprison his judicial and press critics is bad enough; but the more recent suspension of habeas corpus used for the WW2 internment of thousands of Japanese-American families — including children — is hardly something I would use as justification for more constitutional abuses.
I wrote to Reid, to ask him to cite the constitutional provision which allows this proposed limitation on the Supreme Court. He surprised me by responding.
The Constitution lays out the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, but relegates to Congress the unrestricted right to create the judiciary under the Supreme Court, which it has done by creating District Courts and Courts of Appeal. Under this power, Congress can clearly dictate what kind of cases these lower courts can consider (and has exercised this power in the past). If the lower courts are not granted jurisdiction over certain subject matters, and the issue is not part of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, the matter could not make its way to the Supreme Court.
He completely ignores the Article III assignment of jurisdiction for all federal courts, Supreme and inferior, and pretends to find it in the power to institute lower courts. I believe Mr. Reid, apparently primarily a tax attorney, is confusing Article I Tribunals with Article III Courts, and forgetting that tribunals are still “inferior to the supreme Court, just as Article III courts are “such inferior Courts.”
Tribunals are specialized “courts” that Congress can — and has — created for special limited purposes, “administrative courts” such as “tax court.” They are limited in their scope and power compared to Article III Courts.
In theory, Congress could create an ATF “gun court” tribunal responsible for ruling on GCA and NFA charges. But that tribunal — once again — is still “inferior to the Supreme Court” and its rulings would still be subject to Supreme Court review. That means The Supreme Court can still determine whether the tribunal’s acts, and the laws it enforces, are constitutional.
I hope Reid is better at tax law than he is at constitutional law.
He did have one other innovation for his ban; one that avoids the need for a few million door-kicking confiscators (and body bags for them).
These prohibitions should be coupled with a national buy-back program of semi-automatic weapons, but the refusal to sell these weapons or magazines to the government would not itself be a crime. Rather, if a crime is committed using a prohibited weapon or magazine, the owner or immediate seller of such a weapon or magazine would be equally liable for any crime committed with such weapon or magazine, regardless of who pulled the trigger.
So it’s a not a ban. But the criminal use of a semiauto would be a crime.
Hint, Mr.Reid. It already is.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
No registry? Here’s our ATF auditor copying every single page of our A&D books with her cell phone camera using an app that reads text. This data includes make, model, serial number, buyer’s name and address, and even the seller. We have over 20 minutes of footage of this happening in our shop in public view. Yes, this is illegal.
Damned right it’s illegal. The “no registry/database” was the “compromise” that FOPA gave us when we lost new machineguns.
It was compromise the feds could afford to make, since they had no intention of obeying the law anyway.
Oh, and note that Twitter’s censors hid the video behind a “The following media includes potentially sensitive content” warning.
Originally posted at Bear Bussjaeger. Cross-posted because this needs all the visibility it can get.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
A recession is traditionally defined as two consecutive quarters of economic decline.
Who cares what traditional definitions are when you’re a statist thug grabbing more power? This may be new to The Georgia Star News, but it’s business as usual for gun owners.
Fingers became triggers and bump-stocks became machineguns. Hell’s bells, they even redefined “volitional” (not to mention magically finding the very word in the law that doesn’t actually include it).
Braces were braces, until they became stocks and pistols became rifles, and paper weights became firearms.
Hey, remember when the ATF also decided that airsoft guns are machineguns, too? Honestly, what isn’t a machinegun anymore? Well, shoestrings for now; although they were, until the ATF revoked that determination after a few years of ridicule.
That’s not even a complete listing. The ATF — unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats — routinely reinterpret/redefine/just-plain-“find” laws every time somebody invents something that the elected legislators didn’t think of: orthogonal rifling, slide/frame semiautos, and more.
Some of us, who bothered to notice, have been warning for years of the dangers of unelected bureaucrats changing definitions to suit themselves and enslave Americans.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
The latest Dimwit attempt to pass a federal “assault weapon” ban just passed in committee. And none of the swamp critters seem to know what’s in it, if this article is to be believed.
“Would anyone on the other side dispute that this bill would ban weapons that are in common use in the United States today?” Bishop asked.
“That’s the point of the bill,” Nadler replied.
If banning these common firearms is the point, someone seriously screwed up. As introduced, HR 1808 — not yet amended — doesn’t ban any existing firearm.
“(v) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a semiautomatic assault weapon.
“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2021.
It bans transfers and importation of future firearms and magazines. But it — semi-wisely — doesn’t touch existing items. The only mention of confiscation or seizure is (“d) Seizure And Forfeiture Of Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Devices;” again, that’s new “high capacity” magazines.
Or possibly the congresscritters do understand this, and it’s only the Daily Caller that doesn’t grasp the difference between a future “ban” and “confiscate.”
Hint: One would merely piss off a lot of people, while the other would get a lot of cops killed. I think even some Dims get that, which is why mandated confiscation, seizure, or surrender of arms is nowhere in the bill. Yet.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
David Codrea pointed out something very interesting in California’s SB 1327. This is the new law allowing private parties to sue gun dealers and manufacturers.
This bill would create a private right of action for any person against any person who, within this state, (1) manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, or causes to be distributed or transported or imported into the state, keeps for sale or offers or exposes for sale, or gives or lends any firearm lacking a serial number required by law, assault weapon, or .50 BMG rifle; (2) purchases, sells, offers to sell, or transfers ownership of any firearm precursor part that is not a federally regulated firearm precursor part; or (3) is a licensed firearms dealer and sells, supplies, delivers, or gives possession or control of a firearm to any person under 21 years of age, all subject to certain exceptions, as specified. The bill would make these provisions inoperative upon invalidation of a specified law in Texas, and would repeal its provisions on January 1 of the following year.
I’m sure you knew about that, but bad as it looks, it’s far worse. We begin with this.
1021.11. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, any person, including an entity, attorney, or law firm, who seeks declaratory or injunctive relief to prevent this state, a political subdivision, a governmental entity or public official in this state, or a person in this state from enforcing any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any other type of law that regulates or restricts firearms, or that represents any litigant seeking that relief, is jointly and severally liable to pay the attorney’s fees and costs of the prevailing party.
That looks fairly standard: Loser pays winner’s legal expenses. But there’s a catch. If you challenge any state or local gun control law…
(e) Any person, including an entity, attorney, or law firm, who seeks declaratory or injunctive relief as described in subdivision (a), shall not be deemed a prevailing party under this section or any other provision of this chapter.
One more time: Any person, including an entity, attorney, or law firm, who seeks declaratory or injunctive relief from [any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any other type of law that regulates or restricts firearms] shall not be deemed a prevailing party under this section or any other provision of this chapter.
They’ve preemptively declared themselves the winners. By law. In any challenge to any victim-disarmament law.
I’d be interested in hearing what more attorneys think. I’m fairly sure this violate the heck out of the First, Second, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments.
Added: I realized that I was assuming readers would understand some details. That may not always be the case, so I’ll break it down for those who don’t make a hobby of law.
Under this sickening provision, you could still challenge a victim-disarmament law. But, and it’s a big but, you cannot ask the judge for “declaratory or injunctive relief.”
“Declaratory or injunctive relief” means you’re asking the judge to declare that the law is clearly wrong (declaratory), or that it’s likely the law is wrong and temporarily halts enforcement while the trial is underway (injunctive). If you are challenging a magazine ban, for instance, you would want “declaratory or injunctive relief” because you don’t want to have to destroys your magazines while you wait to see if you win your suit (prevail). Of course you want relief.
But now, if you ask for it, you automatically lose, and you’re automatically on the hook for the government’s legal expenses. If you want to win, you cannot ask for a hold on enforcement. You’ll have to get rid of your magazines or face arrest, and buy replacements after you win your case.
Maybe mags are no big deal to you. But what if you were challenging a law that affected something more expensive? Maybe California banned your entire collection of three thousand dollar rifles? Give ’em up, if you want even a chance of “prevailing.”
That’s a hell of an up-front “legal expense,” or as Mark Smith outs it, a “poll tax.”
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Sometimes I see things as related, putting puzzle pieces together if you will, or perhaps its just a common thread, or threat as the case may be. You might want to grab some coffee, hopefully this won’t be boring, but it is long.
In this case, it’s the directions from which the left together with the pharmaceutical industry attacks the mind. In some cases they work together, in some separately, sometimes for a joint purpose, sometimes the purpose is different, but what it has in common is attacks on the mind.
Despite not having adequate data, Birx pushed ahead with her plans to convince Trump and his advisors to go along with her mitigation plans. She writes that in March 2020, she met with the President, and her plan was to obfuscate her intentions for economic shutdowns, knowing that Trump was wary of anything that would tank the economy he had worked so hard to build.
“I couldn’t do anything that would reveal my true intention,” she writes, “to use the travel ban as one brick in the construction of a larger wall of protective measures we needed to enact very soon.” Trump’s team was more concerned about the impacts and potential for loss of lives to Americans of shutting society down. She blasts the administration for their concerns over the economy, concerns which have played out in real time to the point where the country could be facing devastating impacts, as is the globe.
We use mandates because we don’t want to explain. And she lies some more. Doesn’t she come across kindly and sincere? I’ve got a lot of information on the effectiveness of masks and the harms they cause. She’s lying.
But she’s proud she lied, she writes about it in her book
From Deborah Birx’s own hand.
But this isn’t just about the WuFlu debacle and it’s villains, it’s about how they accomplished what they did. I know someone who every time you attempted to give them information, data from another country, or anything scientific would get angry and chirp back “That’s a FOX news talking point”. Which is of course silly, as I don’t have cable, and she never watches FOX. But the idiocy of this never crossed the mind. I mentioned it to my cousin’s wife when we were chatting one day and she nailed it in one. She’s brainwashed. When they can’t form an argument, and can only respond with a phrase it’s a sign of brainwashing. This is someone I wouldn’t have thought would be all that easy to control that way, and I would have been wrong. She still believes the shots are 100% safe and effective, and masking will keep you safe. Those are her sincerely held religious beliefs.
I recently heard a pretty knowledgeable man, Michael Yon, a war correspondant, give a few books he recommended for reading, by everyone. One of them was The Rape Of The Mind by Joost A.M. Merloo 1956. He said if more people had read that book they could never have gotten away with the Covid charade. People would have seen through it. He said if you read that book, it will be much harder to gain control over your mind. SOLD! I haven’t finished it yet, but as I started reading what hit me was January 6th POWs. I’ve written about January 6th before, WHEN A LIE IS THE FIB and the inhumane conditions our prisoners are being subjected to. I thought the Demoncrats and the prison officials were just sadistic asses, but nope, because nothing is too inhumane when it comes to their quest for power. This includes human examples of fecal matter Liz Cheney of the war monger clan and Adam Kinzinger.
From Merloo
The Enforced Confession
During the Korean War, an officer of the United States Marine Corps, Colonel Frank H. Schwable, was taken prisoner by the Chinese Communists. After months of intense psychological pressure and physical degradation, he signed a well-documented “confession” that the United States was carrying on bacteriological warfare against the enemy. The confession named names, cited missions, described meetings and strategy conferences. This was a tremendously valuable propaganda tool for the totalitarians. They cabled the news all over the world: “The United States of America is fighting the peace loving people of China by dropping bombs loaded with disease spreading bacteria, in violation of international law.”
After his repatriation, Colonel Schwable issued a sworn statement repudiating his confession, and describing his long months of imprisonment. Later, he was brought before a military court of inquiry. He testified in his own defense before that court: “I was never convinced in my own mind that we in the First Marine Air Wing had used bug warfare. I knew we hadn’t, but the rest of it was real to me the conferences, the planes, and how they would go about their missions.”
“The words were mine,” the Colonel continued, “but the thoughts were theirs. That is the hardest thing I have to explain: how a man can sit down and write something he knows is false, and yet, to sense it, to feel it, to make it seem real.”
This is the way Dr. Charles W. Mayo, a leading American physician and government representative, explained brainwashing in an official statement before the United Nations: “…the tortures used…although they include many brutal physical injuries, are not like the medieval torture of the rack and the thumb screw. They are subtler, more prolonged, and intended to be more terrible in their effect. They are calculated to disintegrate the mind of an intelligent victim, to distort his sense of values, to a point where he will not simply cry out ‘I did it!’ but will become a seemingly willing accomplice to the complete disintegration of his integrity and the production of an elaborate fiction.”
The Schwable case is but one example of a defenceless prisoner being compelled to tell a big lie. If we are to survive as free men, we must face up to this problem of politically inspired mental coercion, with all its ramifications.
….
As more and more cases of thought control, brainwashing, and mental coercion were disclosed – Cardinal Mindszenty, Colonel Schwable, Robert Vogeler, and others – his interest grew. It was Dr. Meerloo who coined the word menticide, the killing of the spirit, for this peculiar crime.
What they are doing in the DC gulag is the same as the N. Koreans, the N. Viet Nam, the nazis and the communists. It’s torture and it’s done in a certain way to get the results they wanted. Anthony Fauxci’s student Deborah Birx did the same thing to American citizens with her lockdowns using rigged data. People were kept in close to solitary confinement, denied support systems of religious services, family gatherings and often work, if their job was deemed not to be essential. While I grant these days family gatherings might fall under the heading of torture themselves, that too is a result of Fauxci and Birx and their lies and deceptions to President Trump and the American people. America’s very own little Mengele twins with their experiments.
“I had never been to a protest event before the 2020 presidential election,” one man told Klepper. “I had become completely consumed. It took over my life. For three months, I slept in my car. I traveled from rally to rally, from #StopTheSteal event to #StopTheSteal event, for three months, sleeping in my car, going to see the evidence. And then I had to recover. I had PTSD. So, it took me a long time to find myself again. I feel like I just got out of a cult.”
On Tuesday, Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Louie Gohmert, Matt Gaetz and Paul Gosar gave some insight into the horrific conditions Jan. 6 prisoners are allegedly being subjected to.
Greene said the prisoners are held in solitary confinement for 22 to 23 hours a day, according to the Post Millennial. She said prisoners with Celiac disease are getting sick because the only food they are offered contains gluten.
Other prisoners were forced to denounce former President Donald Trump and told that “their views are the views of cult members,” Greene said.
Apparently there are only four Republicans in all of the legislative branch.
But this gets really really ugly when you find out that there has been evidence all along exonerating the Proud Boys of any wrong doing. They’ve been in prison, being tortured and denied human rights when they were innocent.
And at this point, another useless piece of human fecal matter joins the list, Chris Wray who has known all along that these men were innocent from one of his own people, and yet he has said nothing. Wray needs to be removed at once. He needed to be removed a long time ago.
It took a tragedy on America’s birthday, and the death of seven people, to demonstrate once and for all that gun control doesn’t work. Shooter Bobby Crimo bought the murder weapon himself, legally, in Illinois, a state with some of the strongest gun control laws in the country. Red flag laws didn’t stop him. There’s no reason to think they would work anywhere else.
What’s more, the city of Highland Park passed a total ban on assault rifles in 2013. Around the time, Mayor Nancy Rotering bragged: “Banning assault weapons … is one common-sense action to reduce gun violence and protect our children and our communities from potential mass violence and grief.”
….
I saw the unmistakable signs of drug abuse. Crimo was a marijuana smoker—that was obvious. You can see how, over the years, heavily smoking weed turned his skin gray and hair dull. While marijuana use can ease anxiety, PTSD, and even perform miracles for epileptics, for others it can cause psychosis.
There was more to Bobby Crimo’s decline than just dope. In addition to self-medicating, it’s a safe bet that he was on prescription drugs. Crimo was a member of an online movement called the “Sad Boys,” men who defy stereotypes and share their mental health struggles online. Most have depression.
Crimo was known to police as they had been called to his family home multiple times after he made threats of suicide and murder. These are clear signs of depression.
27 per cent of teens aged 12 to 19 are on prescription drugs, most commonly something for ADD. Over 20 years old—the age range of many white male shooters—it switches to antidepressants. The numbers increase every year, as does the percentage of young people who say they’re depressed.
….
Our country is becoming fatherless and faithless, with a teaching workforce offended by masculinity and occasionally outright hostile to the sex and race of its students. Stir in decades of reflexive pill-popping culture, and we arrive at a dangerous moment in history: The tranquilization of the American male.
The whole article is fantastic, really. So this is pharmaceutical industry contributing, and leftist policies combined.
He links the mass shootings in 53 developed countries to boys and men who lacked a father figure, and he specifically mentioned six mass shootings that have occurred in the United States in the 21st century.
“All six of those mass school shootings that have killed more than 10 people have been done by boys, and all six of them have been done by boys who have been ‘dad deprived,’ from Sandy Hook right on through to the Texas shooting,” Farrell said during a recent interview for EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.
….
He said that girls are growing up in the same environment as boys, with access to the same media, video games, and guns and dealing with the same mental health issues, but they aren’t committing any of the shootings.
This is the result of leftist policies. Remember the Julia movie put out by Barry Sotero to showcase the wonder of the failed social/medical experiment called “obamacare”? Men aren’t needed. Fathers aren’t needed in the leftist world.
The boys that committed these mass shootings at schools suffered from not having a caring, strong male role model. In addition to that, boys are often told their feelings don’t matter, which leads to emotional toxicity, said Farrell.
“Boys who are fatherless, very frequently they are not likely to have that postponed gratification that emanates from boundary enforcement. Therefore they start not doing as well in school,” said Farrell.
He said he’s talked to boys in high school, and the boys said what they learn about in school when it comes to male–female issues is toxic masculinity, without any understanding of the sacrifices that males made that led to that toxicity, as well as the concept of “the patriarchy,” said Farrell.
Farrell said boys are suffering because they are being told that their masculinity is bad.
“The world was not dominated by a patriarchy. It was dominated by the need to survive, and in order to survive, both males and females were restricted in their roles,” said Farrell, adding that feminism blames men for societal problems and does not take into account the sacrifices they make for their families.
Darn skippy says the girl who,s Dad was John Wayne, Roy Rogers every other good hero all rolled into one Dad. He wasn’t perfect, but as I became an adult I realized what sacrifices both Dad and Mom made for us kids.
But the left denigrates families. Burn Loot and Murder lionized by the left originally had on their web site as one of their goals the destruction of the nuclear family. So this aspect is leftist policies as well.
Fact: At least 37 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 175 wounded and 82 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made public—neither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs). The most important fact about this list, is that these are only cases where the information about their psychiatric drug use was made public. (See full list below)
The below list includes individuals documented to have been under the influence of psychiatric drugs and not only includes mass shootings, but the use of knives, swords and bombs. 27 international drug regulatory agency warnings cite side effects including mania, violence, psychosis and even homicidal ideation.
In my opinion, this is the pharmaceutical industry, ever greedy for a buck, causing harm with their “safe and effective” medications with no regard to the adverse events resulting. The left happily goes along with it, I suspect partly for the big donations they get from the pharmaceutical industry and partly because it gives them fodder for their gun grabbing campaign aided by their ever willing accomplices in the corporate media.
Mass Shootings: “The Common Denominator Was Psychotropic Medication” A little over 1 minute.
While many have bought into the simplistic idea that availability of firearms is the cause of mass shootings, a number of experts have pointed out a more uncomfortable truth, which is that mass shootings are far more likely the result of how we’ve been mistreating mental illness, depression and behavioral problems
Gun control legislation has shown that law-abiding Americans who own guns are not the problem, because the more gun control laws that have been passed, the more mass shootings have occurred
97.8 percent of mass shootings occur in “gun-free zones,” as the perpetrators know legally armed citizens won’t be there to stop them
Depression per se rarely results in violence. Only after antidepressants became commonplace did mass shootings really take off, and many mass shooters have been shown to be on antidepressants
Antidepressants, especially selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), are well-known for their ability to cause suicidal and homicidal ideation and violence
This whole article makes it abundantly clear to me at least, that far more than guns being responsible for mass shootings, the pharmaceutical industry and their greed is.
As Jeff Snyder put it in The Washington Times: ‘But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow.’”
Who paid the largest criminal fine in the U.S.? Pfizer. And when the lawsuits start for the experimental gene therapy injections, I’m sure it will be again. I’m not sure that the defense of “You can’t sue us because the government was aware of the fraud” is solid when that amount of death results. So this in another example of the pharmaceutical industry working with the left. No, I don’t think they plan this as some plot, but I think it’s more of a symbiotic relationship with both profiting from the work of the other.
There have been plenty of clues, to the future mass killers, and usually after it happens the FIB is right there to say they knew about him. Perhaps if they weren’t so busy chasing down grandmas in wheelchairs and covering up evidence that doesn’t fit with Merrick Garland’s agenda and that of his weaponized agency they could actually, you know, do something about it. Unlike the do with Antifa which is just turn them lose to commit more crimes.
Standard FIB response
I would say not only is our way of life, and our country under attack from within so are our minds, they have to break us down. I think perhaps being aware of what’s going on, and how it works could be helpful The Rape of the Mind . Do what you can to protect yourself, keep in contact with loved ones. If you have a religious community, be there. If you have hobbies, make time for yourself to enjoy them. Consider adopting a shelter pet if you are fur childless, they will pay you back in more love than you can believe. We are made in the image of G-d, he blessed us with minds with the ability to see and reason. If you’re so inclined you could send a letter of encouragement to the January 6th political prisoners perhaps it will offset some of the mental torture they are being subjected to by the US government. Where you can, find gratitude, that helps often times. We are in uncharted waters, no doubt but I believe we are not in them alone.
This is nasty. It sound very much like the feds are trying to building out a database of lawful gun owners.
Missouri Attorney General Condemns FBI’s Illegal Attempts to Harvest Concealed Carry Permit Information from Missouri Sheriffs
The Missouri Attorney General’s Office became aware that the FBI is planning to travel to Missouri in August to do “audits” at sheriff departments across the state, which would include harvesting information on those who have legally obtained a concealed carry permit. The letter states, “It has come to my attention that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has informed several Missouri county sheriffs that they will be showing up in August to ‘audit’ CCW permit holder records. The FBI states that, ‘The audit includes an onsite review of your Concealed Carry Weapons Permits…’ Let me be perfectly clear. Allowing federal agents from the FBI to have access to records of Missourians who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon violates Missouri law and infringes on our Second Amendment rights.”
I’m trying find out if this is happening in Georgia, too. I suggest readers check their states.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
A couple of months ago, I noted that, historically, Dimocrats tended to avoid victim-disarmament bills during election years. And yet, for some strange reason, they felt safe pushing their Federal Firearm Licensing Act, with its troubling definition of “dealer.”
Traditionally, Dims have avoided gun people control bills when elections are coming. It’s a campaign killer (right, Duke Nukem?). Certainly the money is on the same thing being the case this cycle.
But if you have no intention of allowing fair and honest elections (again), what’s the harm in pushing a bill to license gun owners register all firearms and owners via a “may issue” federal licensing system?
A fluke perhaps. But then we got hit with the BipartisanGand-Rape Safer Communities Act: Expanded preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks, red flag laws, a very dangerous redefinition of domestic violence, and more.
Sure enough, Dim, Congress, and Presidential approval keep dropping like rocks as they push this.
Now Breitbart reports that the Dims are going to move on H.R.1808 – Assault Weapons Ban of 2021, It had been stalled in subcommittee for over a year, but suddenly with the mid-terms looming they decided that a new “assault weapon” ban is just the thing that some hundred million gun owners — and specifically the owners of 20 million “assault weapons” — inexplicably want.
Surely someone swimming in the swamp over there remembers what happened last time time they tried this. 1994: assault weapon shortly before mid-terms, Republicans took the House, Senate, and picked up ten state governor seats.
Is “gun control” really all that popular? A brand new poll, purportedly showing that things aren’t quite as bad for the Dims as everyone thinks, says otherwise.
Q15. What do you think is the MOST important problem facing the ccountry today?
Overall, just 10%. Even among Dimwitocrats, it’s only 17%. Does this sound like gun control is a winning mid-term strategy?
Or does it sound like the Dims don’t give a rat’s a** about what real, live voters want; that they know the elections are already in the bag? Some very peculiar primary outcomes suggest they do: In Georgia, one of the most unpopular men in the state — responsible for the illegal balloting in 2020 — handily and unexpectedly won his primary. And in Colorado, everyone is baffled that a director for Zuckerberg’s Dim-supporting election money machine — who polled dead last — magically won the SOS Republican primary.
If the conspiracy-minded want to view those as test runs for the mid-term fraud machine, I won’t argue with you. That the FFLA and BSCA came in on the heels of those weird primaries gives the idea some creedence, at least.
AWB of 2021 suddenly moving reinforces it.
Oh, well. Go buy your ARs and magazines while you can. I would, if I had the money.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Via David Codrea, I saw this amicus brief for TORCIVIA v. SUFFOLK COUNTY. It’s an interesting case, for the sheer police-state thuggery involved. The brief summarizes the circumstances.
Try to keep your blood pressure under control.
The defendant police officers testified that Petitioner would “‘yell and scream,’” “‘explode,’” “‘start ranting and raving and screaming….’” Id. at 349-50. That testimony was contradicted by the fact that the Petitioner’s wife remained asleep in the house during the entire encounter with the police. Id. at 349 n.4.
At some point, the police handcuffed Petitioner, and transported him to a hospital for an emergency mental health evaluation, which demonstrated that he was neither a suicide risk nor a risk to others, and recommended he be discharged. Pet. Cert. at 10. Nevertheless, while Petitioner was at the hospital, officers learned from a computer check that Petitioner possessed a New York State pistol license. Id. at 9-10. Although both Petitioner and his wife refused multiple requests for the combination of the firearms safe to facilitate their seizure, eventually Petitioner was coerced by the threat of continued confinement until he provided the combination for his firearms safe. Id. at 11. Officers returned to Petitioner’s home and seized his firearms without a warrant. Id.
I found this part very interesting, for reasons not specific to this case; it’s more of an extension of the amicus argument.
This case represents a growing trend in the lower courts to reduce Fourth Amendment protections when firearms are involved. There is no basis for courts to create various types of firearms exceptions to the Fourth Amendment. It is well established that the exercise of one constitutional right cannot be conditioned upon the forfeiture of another constitutional right.
“It is well established that the exercise of one constitutional right cannot be conditioned upon the forfeiture of another constitutional right.”
the Second Circuit may not use Torvicia’s exercise of that constitutional right to render him vulnerable to government searches and seizures of his firearms which violate Fourth Amendment protections
You can’t violate his privacy and property rights because he chose to exercise his Second Amendment protected right.
And yet, New York already had, even before this unlawful and unconstitutional firearm confiscation.
The state violated Torcivia’s Fourth Amendment rights when they required him to register himself and his pistol before allowing him the “privilege” of exercising the right to keep and bear that pistol. How secure are your “ persons, houses, papers, and effects” when you have to provide a list of them to the state in get permission to have them.
And this case shows exactly how dangerous forfeiting your privacy is: the state used that no longer private information to steal an innocent man’s property. Registering his exercise of the 2A did“render him vulnerable to government searches and seizures of his firearms.” Torcivia was not “secure” the instant he got a pistol license, and the state used that vulnerability against him.
Any one right does not exist in a vacuum. All constitutionally protected rights are fundamental and individual, and they interact. HELLER Established the the Second Amendment is an individual right. And from NYSRPA v. Bruen:
The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self defense is no different.
Second Amendment rights are no different than other rights… and Fourth Amendment rights are no different than the Second.
Licensing and registration force one to choose between giving up your constitutional Fourth Amendment right or surrendering your Second Amendment right. At your peril, either way.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.
