Every year more people die from Fentanyl, cancer, automobiles, etc. than from gun murders. Statistically, a child dying in a school mass shooting event is rarer than getting struck by lightning, twice
Well obviously you are an "extremist" if you disagree with any government policy, whether medical mandates or reparations or retroactive tax policies or affirmative action grading or support for historical "founders" or redistributive policies or insert ____________ here.
And not only an "extremist" but most possibly "mentally defective" under which case you sacrifice all and any right for the greater good and any and all assets owned will be seized to cover the expenses of your "treatment."
"Leo Beletsky, a law and health sciences professor at Northeastern University, presented the controversial move to city officials during a virtual hearing last week, according to the news station."
“When you commandeer a property, there is no preliminary process. The government just comes in and takes over private property,” Beletsky told the outlet.
“There’s a long tradition of doing that in the United States,” he added. “This is not some radical idea.”
Good article. My approach is simple...2A is a right not a privilege granted by the government. Just like 1A is a right and not granted by government. This is as silly as the government saying one cannot talk about Hunter Biden's laptop. They have no legal basis for making that rule but they sure tried when they censored NY Post on Twitter. The government cannot hedge a right it did not grant. Therefore any and all talk about this shit is meaningless. I tell gun nutters point blank...you want to do away with 2A, then call constitutional convention to remove the 2A. This was done for Prohibition...same can be done for 2A. But since they are not willing to do that (whatever BS reason they concoct), I am under no obligation to follow a law that allows them to break the law. Red Flag Gun Laws are unconstitutional as they are proscribing something they have no right to do. I am under no obligation to follow that law. Think about it...why should we legitimize a law that has no legal basis in fact? Just because some government hack writes it up and codifies it does not mean it is morally or legally right. (aka Dred Scott decision)
Ending the gun control battle is going to come through our collective acts of civil disobedience and will require all of us to expend our blood, sweat, and tears. Emails, blog postings, giving money to the NRA, and holding up signs maintains the status quo and accomplishes nothing. The oligarchy knows this and is banking on our laziness to perpetuate this current illegal fascist technocratic regime. If you are not willing to get off up your ass, then shut up and give your guns to the cute, friendly female ATF agent at your door who has a SWAT team surrounding your house...
The federal government is illegitimate as are its agencies like the ATF, and as such they are criminal.
Natural rights is what the Constitution is protecting, and by singling out certain examples of said natural rights (1-8A), the Founders established that all natural rights not limited to the Bill of Rights supersede any government, whether federal or state level.
You are so very correct. Ironically your point is made by the simple fact that your statements (and mine) are considered terroristic and incendiary by the Dept. of Homeland Security. That's all we need to know to currently establish the illegitimacy of our federal government.
The question I have for the 2A supporters...are you willing to go against the ATF? Are you willing to go to jail and forgo whatever life you have to fight for the principle? Are we willing to continue to make ghost guns and not bother with serialized lowers? If not, then just bend over and be sure to touch your toes and say "Hit me harder Uncle Joe!"
"And *then* what are you prepared to do? If you open the can on these worms you must be prepared to go all the way. Because they're not gonna give up the fight, until one of you is dead." - Sean Connery as Malone in "The Untouchables"
Posting same comment just posted on other 2nd smartest today.
In total agreement with 2nd smartest.
It is not a gun ownership problem. It is an unfolding burgeoning national crises of potential mental stability, a consequential resultant of destructive federal actions, recent societal trends, main media perpetuation of all negative, and consequences there of.
It is a serious misdirection to focus on the gun. Focus on the causes. Causes which when accumulate can destroy a mind.
Recall events of the last couple years. Draconian actions taken to combat Covid, mandates resulting in economic, business, family and individual disasters. There has been the rise of many new cultures, many disruptive causing serious contentions and even hatred. Examples include re-born and enhanced racism, Critical Race Theory,cults of cancelism, wokism, transgenderism, LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer or questioning), misinformation labeling, anti-constitution, anti-nation founders, anti-free speech, anti-law enforcement, blessing of property destruction, political and sexually skewed indoctrination of young children, and so on. The effect of these is cumulative, more so on young, not yet strengthened minds.
To blame people for simply owning guns and use that to disarm is a calculated pre-meditated plan to disarm. Period.
And here is a quote from an article by John Silveira that should put the "Militia" argument to rest, it won't, but it should.
“In May of 1792, five months after the adoption of the 2nd Amendment, the Militia Act was passed. That act distinguished between the enrolled militia and the organized militia. Before the passing- of that act, there was only the enrolled militia, which was the body of all able-bodied men between the ages of 17 and 44, inclusively, and it is that militia to which the 2nd Amendment refers. It couldn’t refer to the organized militia because it didn’t exist yet. The 2nd Amendment was to ensure that this body of citizens is armed and that’s why the Founding Fathers thought to place it in the Bill of Rights. Legally, both militias still exist.”
Well obviously you are an "extremist" if you disagree with any government policy, whether medical mandates or reparations or retroactive tax policies or affirmative action grading or support for historical "founders" or redistributive policies or insert ____________ here.
And not only an "extremist" but most possibly "mentally defective" under which case you sacrifice all and any right for the greater good and any and all assets owned will be seized to cover the expenses of your "treatment."
"Leo Beletsky, a law and health sciences professor at Northeastern University, presented the controversial move to city officials during a virtual hearing last week, according to the news station."
“When you commandeer a property, there is no preliminary process. The government just comes in and takes over private property,” Beletsky told the outlet.
“There’s a long tradition of doing that in the United States,” he added. “This is not some radical idea.”
SEE, 2SG, "Not some radical idea!"
"In an insane world, the sane must be institutionalized."
--2SG
I'm adding this to my list of quotes!
DOUBLE BRAVO
I aim to please.
Good article. My approach is simple...2A is a right not a privilege granted by the government. Just like 1A is a right and not granted by government. This is as silly as the government saying one cannot talk about Hunter Biden's laptop. They have no legal basis for making that rule but they sure tried when they censored NY Post on Twitter. The government cannot hedge a right it did not grant. Therefore any and all talk about this shit is meaningless. I tell gun nutters point blank...you want to do away with 2A, then call constitutional convention to remove the 2A. This was done for Prohibition...same can be done for 2A. But since they are not willing to do that (whatever BS reason they concoct), I am under no obligation to follow a law that allows them to break the law. Red Flag Gun Laws are unconstitutional as they are proscribing something they have no right to do. I am under no obligation to follow that law. Think about it...why should we legitimize a law that has no legal basis in fact? Just because some government hack writes it up and codifies it does not mean it is morally or legally right. (aka Dred Scott decision)
Ending the gun control battle is going to come through our collective acts of civil disobedience and will require all of us to expend our blood, sweat, and tears. Emails, blog postings, giving money to the NRA, and holding up signs maintains the status quo and accomplishes nothing. The oligarchy knows this and is banking on our laziness to perpetuate this current illegal fascist technocratic regime. If you are not willing to get off up your ass, then shut up and give your guns to the cute, friendly female ATF agent at your door who has a SWAT team surrounding your house...
The federal government is illegitimate as are its agencies like the ATF, and as such they are criminal.
Natural rights is what the Constitution is protecting, and by singling out certain examples of said natural rights (1-8A), the Founders established that all natural rights not limited to the Bill of Rights supersede any government, whether federal or state level.
You are so very correct. Ironically your point is made by the simple fact that your statements (and mine) are considered terroristic and incendiary by the Dept. of Homeland Security. That's all we need to know to currently establish the illegitimacy of our federal government.
The question I have for the 2A supporters...are you willing to go against the ATF? Are you willing to go to jail and forgo whatever life you have to fight for the principle? Are we willing to continue to make ghost guns and not bother with serialized lowers? If not, then just bend over and be sure to touch your toes and say "Hit me harder Uncle Joe!"
i believe it was 1933 (war criminal roosevelt) when the governments were
incorporated that the rot started, see anna von reitz https://annavonreitz.com/
Not only is this well and spot on written but ALL of us better take it to heart and defend our rights because our lives depend on it.
"And *then* what are you prepared to do? If you open the can on these worms you must be prepared to go all the way. Because they're not gonna give up the fight, until one of you is dead." - Sean Connery as Malone in "The Untouchables"
The obvious
Which is?
I can’t believe you have to ask!
Yeah...let's stop being implicit and start being explicit. Say it like it is!
no point putting a target on yourself, as you said " they ain,t going
to give up", its been obvious for sometime where this is heading
a reply from a Brit, we are the reason you got 2A, youre welcome!
Posting same comment just posted on other 2nd smartest today.
In total agreement with 2nd smartest.
It is not a gun ownership problem. It is an unfolding burgeoning national crises of potential mental stability, a consequential resultant of destructive federal actions, recent societal trends, main media perpetuation of all negative, and consequences there of.
It is a serious misdirection to focus on the gun. Focus on the causes. Causes which when accumulate can destroy a mind.
Recall events of the last couple years. Draconian actions taken to combat Covid, mandates resulting in economic, business, family and individual disasters. There has been the rise of many new cultures, many disruptive causing serious contentions and even hatred. Examples include re-born and enhanced racism, Critical Race Theory,cults of cancelism, wokism, transgenderism, LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer or questioning), misinformation labeling, anti-constitution, anti-nation founders, anti-free speech, anti-law enforcement, blessing of property destruction, political and sexually skewed indoctrination of young children, and so on. The effect of these is cumulative, more so on young, not yet strengthened minds.
To blame people for simply owning guns and use that to disarm is a calculated pre-meditated plan to disarm. Period.
https://youtu.be/KXzkg1iHmcU
I lost all my firearms in boating accident with my Pms!
And here is a quote from an article by John Silveira that should put the "Militia" argument to rest, it won't, but it should.
“In May of 1792, five months after the adoption of the 2nd Amendment, the Militia Act was passed. That act distinguished between the enrolled militia and the organized militia. Before the passing- of that act, there was only the enrolled militia, which was the body of all able-bodied men between the ages of 17 and 44, inclusively, and it is that militia to which the 2nd Amendment refers. It couldn’t refer to the organized militia because it didn’t exist yet. The 2nd Amendment was to ensure that this body of citizens is armed and that’s why the Founding Fathers thought to place it in the Bill of Rights. Legally, both militias still exist.”
An article well worth your time.
https://www.backwoodshome.com/we-dont-need-no-steenking-2nd-amendment/