Monthly Archives: November 2012

100 years of Gun Control…the Progressive’s “Long Con”


100 years of Gun Control…the Progressive’s “Long Con”

Socialist Progressive’s have patience, I’ll give them that, and it is that patience that has given them so many victories in their long con.  They are the architect masters of the slippery slope.  They are so good at what they do that for the past 100+ years they have continued to chip away at the Second Amendment, the only thing that truly keeps them at bay, and yet the majority of Americans think they have more gun rights than ever before.

In fact, this past 100 years have crippled the 2nd Amendment to the point that it hardly resembles what our founding fathers intended.  Do you think that Adams and Jefferson, Franklin and Paine, Washington and Hancock, who had all resisted and fought against tyranny would actually require a free citizen to ask permission in order to exercise a right?  But yet, in most states that is exactly what is required if you wish to carry a firearm.

The Continental Army used the most advanced firearms of the day to defeat the British, yet the right to bear arms has been gelded in modern times to limit any ability to resist oppression.

Yet in the past 100 years, slowly…ever slowly…the rights have been eroded one at a time.  Every time these infringements were passed off as necessary to protect people, to protect the children.  Guns were demonized even though they were inanimate objects while the right to bear them was undermined.

Bypassing the post Civil War’s racist orgins of gun control that I previously touched upon, we’ll start in the Act that has been called the death of inalienable rights; The Sullivan Act of 1911.

New York state senator Timothy Sullivan, a corrupt Tammany Hall politician, represented New York’s Red Hook district. Commercial travelers passing through the district would be relieved of their valuables by armed robbers. In order to protect themselves and their property, travelers armed themselves. This raised the risk of, and reduced the profit from, robbery. Sullivan’s outlaw constituents demanded that Sullivan introduce a law that would prohibit concealed carry of pistols, blackjacks, and daggers, thus reducing the risk to robbers from armed victims.

The criminals, of course, were already breaking the law and had no intention of being deterred by the Sullivan Act from their business activity of armed robbery. Thus, the effect of the Sullivan Act was precisely what the criminals intended. It made their life of crime easier.

The Sullivan Act basically dictates that a US Citizen is required to ask the government for permission before they are allowed to exercise their rights.  If something requires permission then permission can be denied.  This is akin to asking the government permission to vote every election and the politician in charge denying you because he doesn’t like who you are going to vote for.

Twenty years later, the Federal Government passed the National Firearms Act of 1934.  Where the founding fathers declared independence based heavily on the unfair and punitive taxes levied by the king, the Act of 1934 created a whole new tax burden on the public.  In general, imposes a statutory excise tax on the manufacture and transfer of certain firearms and mandates the registration of those firearms.  The hope was that the Act would tax these weapons out of existence.

Thirty some years later, the government was at it once again when they passed the Gun Control Act of 1968.  This gun control measure would not only infringe upon the 2nd Amendment but would also dictate to businesses how they would run and force them to operate under the auspices of the Federal Government.  Hence the creation of the Federal Firearms Licence and the formation of the ATF as a wing of the Internal Revenue Service.  They would become autonomous in 1972.

Just shy of 20 years later, the Progressive’s learned a new trick and used a ludicrous euphemism when they passed the Firearm Owners Protection Act.  The only way that this act protected firearm owners was in the twisted minds of the gun control zealots who thought to protect firearm owners by denying them firearms.  By outlawing a number of firearms including automatic weapons made after the signing of the Act, the law basically made a de facto ban on them as older guns would eventually breakdown and become useless. The act further limited the firearms available to the general public as well as bolstering the ATF’s ability to track firearm owners.  The ATF Firearms Tracing System (FTS) contains hundreds of millions of firearm tracing and registration records, and consists of several databases.

A scant 8 years later in 1994 the Federal Assault Weapons Ban was passed.  Like the 1986 Act, this ban outlawed any so called “assault weapon” manufactured past the date of its signing.  Fortunately for the millions of gun owners in America who like these weapons and liberty in general, this is where the tide began to turn.  The pro gun contingent in Congress put a 10 year sunset ban on the bill.  In 2004, the bill was not extended and a small taste of liberty was returned to the land.

It was also around this time that gun owners as a whole started to wake up and see the long con that was being run on them by gun hating progressives who thirst for control.  Below is a graphic depicting the rise in the Right to Carry firearms in America starting in 1986.  It was in 1994, after the AWB that things really started to pick up.

In the past 26 years we have went from a country in which it was ILLEGAL to carry a gun in 15 states (an additional 26 states could deny you for no good reason at all) to being allowed to carry in 49 states with only 8 states who could arbitrarily deny you your right.  There are even 4 states that allow their citizens to carry freely without any need to seek permission from the Government.  These Constitutional Carry states are the archetype that I hope the rest of the country will follow in due time.


It is not only in carrying that people have begun to wake up.  But with the passage of Firearms Freedom Acts in a number of states.  By passing this Act States are trying to undo the damage and infringements that the gun control progressives have slowly insinuated through the country these passed 100+ years.

Despite the resurgence of the 2nd Amendment, remember, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has been bludgeoned over the passed 100 years and it was only recently in 2008 with the Supreme Court Decision in Heller v DC that the Government first acknowledged judicially that the 2nd Amendment was an individual right.

That ruling, I remind you was 5-4.  That is how close we were to losing and the progressive gun control zealots from winning.  But don’t think for one second that the long con is over.  As I said, the enemies of liberty are patient.  And if one avenue is closed to them such as the passing legislation, then they will seek out others.  These can be found in Obama’s militantly anti gun judicial nominees and his full on support of the UN’s gun control measure, the UN Arms Trade Treaty.

In order to maintain America as the Land of the Free we must continue to be vigilant against the con men who would try and convince us that our rights are negotiable or are up to compromise.  The fight may seem never ending…but that doesn’t mean it can’t be won.

Federal Court Rules you do NOT have right to carry firearms


Federal Court Rules you do NOT have right to carry firearms

That’s right.  The 2nd and 4th Federal Court of Appeals have heard arguments dealing with the carrying of firearms outside of the home and one has ruled it is NOT a constitutionally guaranteed right.

In both New York and Maryland, where the lawsuits were brought, the states have enacted draconian permit systems that favor the wealthy and well connected.  While the rest of us must ASK to exercise our constitutional right a la Oliver Twist.

In Maryland, in order to be allowed to carry a weapon outside of your home you must provide the overlordsissuing authority with evidence to “verify threats occurring beyond their residence”.  Apparently, the state of Maryland only allows psychics to carry outside of the home.  Or maybe criminals in Maryland have begun to send their victims correspondences ahead of time.  I mean, it’s not like random crime ever happens in Baltimore.

This requirement is not only unconstitutional but also bigoted and insulting.  In the eyes of Maryland, the easiest way to verify these future threats is to be rich or famous or a public figure.  It’s pretty much a tough luck attitude with regards to us everyday Joes and Jills who just want to protect ourselves from a mugger or a rapist.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals is set to render a decision within the next month or so.

With New York and the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, the case covered the same issue, the need for a “verifiable threat” before being issued a CCW.  Since New York is also a “may-issue” state the level of threat is left to the issuing authority.  While in most of New York the difficulty to get a CCW is on par with Maryland, in New York City it is nigh impossible to do so.

Unless you are buddy buddy with hypocrite Mayor Bloomberg or a mega millionaire that is.  In a city of 8 MILLION people, the number of permits to carry (as a private citizen – non business) awarded annually is in the dozens.  I won’t even do the math to point out how ridiculous that number is, based on the total population. Plus, you need to pay the $400+ that is non-refundable when they deny you.

The main issue of the suit was New York’s Sullivan Act which, when passed 101 years ago, which made New York State a may issue state to begin with.

The 2nd Circuit Court wasted no time in hurrying their decision stating that based on the Supreme Court ruling in Heller that the 2nd Amendment’s core right is within the home and that any infringement that can be placed on carrying outside of the home may be done so.  In other words, the de facto ban that New York City has in place is allowed to stand.

Now, both of these cases will undoubtedly go before the Supreme Court to be decided definitively.  To all the readers who claim they are pro gun, yet voted for Obama I wonder if you will be hoping as much as I, that the high court hears these cases before one of the Heller Five steps down.  I mean, you keep telling me that Obama is so pro gun, I wonder if you would like the fate of the Second Amendment to rest in the hands of Kagan or Sotomayor?

Obama’s incarnation of Hitler’s Youth


Obama’s incarnation of Hitler’s Youth

Too often, debate in America seems to end with the rhetorical firebombing of one side (usually liberals) calling those that disagree with them Nazis or Hitler.  Ironic since Hitler and Nazis were socialists, but I digress.

But sometimes, when the veil of hidden agendas is thin and something doesn’t stay under the radar, one can be amazed at just how similar the Obama Administration resembles the Third Reich.

In this matter I am speaking specifically of Obama’s Youth Brigade, euphemistically called by the administration the FEMA Corp.

Before we get into the FEMA Corp, let’s rundown the Hitler Youth group.  The HY were a paramilitary organization created by Adolf Hitler in 1922 comprising of German boys from the age of 14-18.  The HY was organized into local cells on a community level (Community Organizer…that sounds familiar).  Such cells had weekly meetings at which various Nazi doctrines were taught by adult HY leaders. Regional leaders typically organized rallies and field exercises in which several dozen Hitler Youth cells would participate.

As a paramilitary organization, the Hitler Youth could be and were used as an armed auxiliary force to perform a variety of duties such as being active in fire brigades and assisting with recovery efforts from natural disasters and later Allied bombings.  The Hitler Youth also assisted in such organizations as the Reich Postal Service, fire services, Reich radio service and served among anti-aircraft defense crews.

All in all, the Hitler Youth served as Hitler’s Homeland Defense contingent of people that were wholly and completely under his thrall and could be used at a moments notice to quell any unrest within the Reich under the auspices of disaster relief.  Members of HY were indoctrinated from the moment they joined in order to be completely behind their leader did not hesitate to instill their leaders vision.

Fast forward some 90+ years and we have President Obama saying this in 2008 in Colorado:

 “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

A civilian national security force?  I doubt he was talking about private militias, and I guess the National Guard wasn’t what he had in mind.  Why?  Because neither of those groups would be directly under his control.  Rather, they would answer to either a free citizen, or a state.  But a “civilian national security force” under the purview of FEMA would answer directly to him.  And when you hand select who will be allowed to join this force you are all ready weeding out the possibility of dissent.

Let’s talk about this force and who are members of it.  In October, the Dept of Homeland Security graduated its first class of 231 Homeland Youth. These young adults, aged 18-24, were recruited from the President’s AmeriCorp volunteers and represent the first wave of DHS’s youth corps, designed specifically to create a full time, paid, standing army of FEMA Youth across the country.

Americorp participants aged 18-24?  I challenge you to pick out a demographic that would be MORE pliable to Obama’s indoctrination.  This is his bread and butter constituency, the one that got him elected twice and the one that his economy has robbed of a future.  Of course they will view being a part of the Obama’s Youth Brigade as proof that their chosen Messiah can do no wrong and is there to help them.  I mean…its either this or living with your parents because you can’t get a job in this economy.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I am all for disaster relief…but my question is what do they need billions of rounds of ammunition and armored fighting vehicles for?

The Department of Homeland Defense has in the past six months purchased in excess of 1.2 BILLION rounds of ammuntion to be doled out to FEMA, the Social Security Administration, the TSA and other traditionally non military organizations.

I guess in Obama’s America tradition is something to be torn down to be replaced by his vision.

So, what do we have?  We have a paramilitary organization who are true believers and followers of Obama and who will not question the orders given.  They have been indoctrinated to follow their orders and have been heavily armed and equipped to crackdown on dissent or opposition.  And they come under the guise of disaster relief and help from the government.  If this isn’t a redux of the Hitler’s Youth Brigade I do not know what is.

These are interesting times we live in.  No wonder Obama refuses to nominate anyone other than rabid anti gun judges to judicial posts.  The Second Amendment is his last hurdle in order to get what he wants, complete control.  He rules America by Executive Order, he has no need for silly little things like Federal Budgets, he flaunts his disdain for the citizenry openly and his contempt for the Constitution is palpable.

If one wants to see how this is run on a smaller level, one need look no further than Mayor Bloomberg of New York.  He has all but disarmed his populace, rules by fiat, and during the Hurricane Sandy recoverydenied access to Brooklyn to the National Guard because he didn’t want anyone in his city that didn’t answer directly to him…citizenry be damned.

And I am not saying that in four years Obama will try to further circumvent the constitution by running for President again, he doesn’t have too.  If he is allowed to lay the ground work that undermines not only the Constitution but also the very nature of being American, then he has won.  It doesn’t matter who takes over after because the bell cannot be un-rung, and if a follower of his wins then the precipitous slide speeds all the faster.

These are interesting times indeed.  The next four years may fully and wholly dictate the future of America unlike any since the Revolution.

Gun owners face media lynching regardless of guilt or innocence


Gun owners face media lynching regardless of guilt or innocence

Once again the liberal press and gun control zealots are going out of their way to make criminals look like saints and victims look like monsters.

This can be seen in the case of George Zimmerman who defended himself from a savage beating at the hands of Trayvon Martin.  The police on the scene, who witnessed first hand Zimmerman’s injuries, declared that he had acted in self defense and released him.  But when the press heard that a man named George Zimmerman had shot a black “kid” named Trayvon, they swooped in like media Valkyrie in order to paint this as a hate crime.

I can all but guarantee you that if George Zimmerman used his mothers maiden name and went by Jorge Guiterrez (not sure of his mom’s Peruvian maiden name so just used that as an example) then this case would never have seen the light of day.  Plus, when it was discovered that George was a registered Democrat the Liberal Press would have fled the story in a heart beat.

Because the truth doesn’t fit into their narrative…they hear that a guy named Zimmerman shot an unarmed black “kid” and all of a sudden they paint Zimmerman as a white, extreme conservative, tea partier who shot Martin based solely on race.  Zimmerman never had a chance.  They media had tried and convicted him on his name and because doing so was good for ratings they justified it to themselves.

NBC went so far as to doctor recordings in order to make it appear that Zimmerman was racist. The liberal media doesn’t let a little thing like truth get in the way of a good sensationalized story after all.

Then there are the photos of the Zimmerman and Martin.  For the first few weeks of the story the only picture you saw of Zimmerman was his mug shot, which as usual for mug shots, did not paint him in a good light.  On the other hand, the media had no qualms showing pictures of Martin as a happy bubbly child.  Of course, the pictures they used were taken 5 years prior when Martin was just a boy…not the 6″+ thug life living, tatooed gansta that he presented himself to the world as.

The reason I bring up the Zimmerman case is because I have just read of another story in which the media is spinning a pair of burglars into angelic kids fooling around and a man defending his home as a gun toting maniac gunning them down.

In Little Falls, Minnesota on Thanksgiving, a 17 and 18 year old pair of cousins break into the house of a senior citizen with the intention of robbing him.  Unfortunately for them, homeowner Byron Smith (who had suffered previous break-ins for a loss of over $10,000) was home and armed.

Mr. Smith ended the lives of both of these criminals who had broken into his house.

Normally, I would celebrate this as a moment of real life defense.  Unfortunately Mr. Smith seemed to have gone overboard with the defense of his home and after shooting the criminals, “more times than he needed to” he claims, shot the 18 year old in the head to end the suffering.

The story takes an even odder twist after that.  Smith wraps the bodies in tarps and puts them in his basement and doesn’t call the police until the following day, explaining that he didn’t want to bother anyone on Thanksgiving.  While thoughtful, probably not the best way to go legally.  Of course, he could have been in a state of shock; who knows how people will react in both those high stress moments and the subsequent aftermath?

Now, what do I see when I see this story online?  Pictures of the two burglars in the best photos that can be found of them and Mr. Smith’s mug shot which is not flattering in the least.  From the visual alone we are being  bombarded with bias.  Instead of seeing two criminals who broke into an old mans house with a lead pipe you see two kids with bright smiles who are said to be popular in school.  As if popularity makes you incapable of crime.

Like I said, I am not sure where I fall on this story.  Shooting two home invaders is no doubt an intense situation and who can really say how they will react?  Smith, who is facing 2nd Degree Murder charges may very well be convicted but it should be based on the facts, not the bias media’s attempt to railroad him by casting a pair of criminals as saints and an old man defending his home as the devil.  The media wants to paint him as this monster but maybe he was just suffering from shock over what happened.

Trials are usually used to determine little things like guilt or innocence, at least they used to be.  Now the media basically reports who is innocent and who is guilty without so much as waiting for the jury.

I don’t know what was going through Smith’s mind that day when these criminals armed with a lead pipe entered his home.  I’ll bet you dollars to donuts though, that those two criminals would be alive today if they hadn’t broken into Smith’s house on Thanksgiving and tried to rob him. But I guess that bit of deductive reasoning isn’t as sexy as liberally biased sensationalism “journalism”.

All in all, as a gun owner remember this, if you ever find yourself needed to use your firearm to defend yourself, regardless of how justified, expect a high tech lynching from the media.

Kentucky flips the script on gun buyback programs & Heinlein views in Action


Kentucky flips the script on gun buyback programs & Heinlein views in Action

As you may recall, I have utter disdain for gun buyback programs.  With that being said I was greatly amused that the State of Kentucky has done a one-eighty on the idea and have begun a sell back program.

The program has been in place for 15 years now and as you can imagine, the gun control zealots are still bemoaning the “inevitability” of blood running in the streets.  Even after a decade and a half of positive results, some are still criticizing the program such as Kenton County Commonwealth Attorney Rob Sanders.

“In my experience, the guns that end up there are dangerous weapons, poorly made, often damaged or really don’t have value unless you’re looking for an inexpensive firearm.  And if you’re looking for a cheap gun, you’re usually up to no good.”

Apparently Mr. Sanders doesn’t believe that poor people have a right to protect themselves and their family against crime.  Or maybe he is speaking from a position of bigoted elitism stating that all poor people are criminals.

Fortunately, when this bill was proposed and passed in 1998,  then State Rep. Bob Damron, D-Nicholasville, didn’t let baseless and bigoted claims prevent him from moving forward with this gun sell back program.  He argued that in his rural district the police told him that they were forced to destroy firearms that were better than they were being issued.  Damron’s bill allowed the police to keep some weapons for departmental use while sending the bulk of them to the Kentucky State Police for auction.

Not surprisingly due to the political nature of the position, a number of police chiefs, nearly unanimously in Northern Kentucky opposed the measure, going so far as circumventing the law and stockpiling these weapons to avoid following the law.  In 2000 though the Kentucky Assembly amended the law requiring that the weapons be turned over for auction within 90 days.

Now though, after $7 million worth of bullet proof vests and other police needs have been funded directly by this program, the police are among its biggest supporters. Though the support isn’t universal, and you will always have the gun control zealots try to undermine the rights of the citizenry with outlandish claims and sensationalism, it seems that Kentucky is on the right path and that the gun sell back program will continue on its successful path.


An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. -Robert Heinlein 

I’m a fan of Heinlein.  If you are uninitiated with his writing, you may be familiar with the movie Starship Troopers which was loosely based on his novel of the same name.  Heinlein was a science fiction writer who used the otherworldly landscapes to promote a libertarian philosophy.  As the above quote can attest to, Heinlein believed you are responsible for your own actions and when those actions have consequences you will act with greater care.

Why do I bring up Heinlein?  Because I detest Black Friday.  The day after Thanksgiving when people act like animals in order to get a discount on some materialistic good.  Every year you hear stories of the worst of people coming through on Black Friday, people being trampled why others do nothing to help, punches thrown over this bauble or that.

Imagine my surprise and delight when I heard about the following tale from a Sears store in San Antonio.  Being Black Friday, a long line existed heading into the store as people decide that the hours upon hours they wait in line are worth wasting in order to save a couple of bucks.  Of course, some people don’t like waiting, some people think that they can do whatever they want because everyone else are sheep and will be cowed by a dominant personality.

That is what one line cutting rude and violent man thought at least.  When the doors opened he sprinted in front of the line pushing and shoving his way to get in front of everyone.  As you can imagine some people didn’t care for his attitude or his line cutting ways and told him to go back to the end of the line.  The line cutters response was to start punching people in the face.

I can only imagine that he was bigger than the other men and women in the line so he felt confident that he would just muscle his way past those weaker than him.  What he didn’t expect, was when one man who he punched in the face responded by pulling a handgun out and pointed it at him.

Like cowards always do, the line cutting assaulter ran away and shopping continued normally.  The armed citizen will not face any charges as he had a CCW and acted right and proper in his response to the assault.

Will Mr. Face Punching Scumbag start throwing punches next time to get ahead in line?  Something tells me, probably not.  I think he got a lesson his parents neglected to give him years ago…actions have consequences.

But in an unarmed society, where the big man rules without challenge, where gangs can use muscle to oppress the weak, there are no consequences for the strong, only fallout for the weak.

 I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. -Robert Heinlein

How to Stop Obama’s Gun Control Agenda


How to Stop Obama’s Gun Control Agenda

Yesterday, I touched on the topic of some states passing the Firearms Freedom Act. Originally introduced and passed in Montana, the FFA declares that any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states.  This is probably the best way to defeat Obama’s gun control agenda that we have at the present.

So, in its purest form, without restriction, the FFA would allow a firearm that is built and kept within a state to remain un-infringed from gun control zealots and bureaucratic miasmas.

The only reason the Federal Government can come up with to justify its jurisdiction over firearms in the first place is through the Commerce Clause, which allows them to regulate interstate trade.  The leap between regulating trade and infringing on the Second Amendment rights of Americans is a governmental overreach and is as insincere as it is cravenness.

If every state were to pass a true Firearm Freedom Act, then the unconstitutional infringements and taxes found in the ludicrously named Firearm Owners Protection Act would be circumvented completely.  FFA also shields states from Obama’s desire for a Semi Automatic Rifle Ban.

In theory, if Texas were to pass a full FFA, they could forge, assemble and sell machine guns, suppressors and large capacity magazines within the state without having to jump through the Federal hoops.  Remember, these things are legal all ready, but they require excessive Federal taxes to be paid while also needing to be registered as well as being subject to approval by the Federal Government in the first place.  Those three requirements in and of themselves are an affront to the Second Amendment AND to States’ Rights.

Upon passage, even if a ban of these or semi automatic rifles were to pass through Congress, so long as the weapon was built in Texas and stayed there, the Federal Government would have no justification for interceding since the the whole premise of Federal Gun Control is based off the Commerce Clause.

While the Federal Government uses the Commerce Clause to justify its gun control policy, State FFA’s are a 10th Amendment challenge to this overreach.

8 States have all ready passed an FFA while 26 others have either introduced legislation or are intending to soon.  I encourage everyone to contact your state representatives and let them know that this is something that you want to see move forward.

Here is a map of the states that have passed or are considering passing an FFA

How Obama Will Ban Guns without Congressional Approval


How Obama Will Ban Guns without Congressional Approval

In Edgar Allen Poe’s short story “The Purloined Letter”, the criminal fools the police by hiding the stolen letter in plain sight.  While the police were expecting all these elaborate twists and turns, the thief just cleverly disguised his crime simply so that nearly none could deduce it.

So too, does President Obama plan on banning guns in such an outright simple way.  And in so doing making it all the more nefarious.

Will Obama try to continue to push for the UN Arms Trade Treaty that will cripple the industry and force a national firearms registration for all participants of said treaty?  Yes.

Will Obama continue to pack the courts with militantly anti-gun judges?  Yes.

But these are just misdirection.  Because, while Second Amendment activists can rouse the masses and fight against such moves by entreating our Senators against such madness, Obama will quietly be changing the rules to which he need not seek permission from anyone.

The law he would utilize is all ready on the books and will undermine the 2nd Amendment by criminalizing millions of guns currently in the possession of law abiding citizens.

I speak of the Gun Control Act of 1968.  How can Obama accomplish the banning of so many guns?  Simple…he will just reclassify them.  All Obama has to do is instruct the BATF to classify semiautomatic firearms and multiple capacity ammunition feeding devices as Title 2 National Firearms Act items under the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Title II of the Gun Control Act of 1968 is a revision of the National Firearms Act of 1934, and pertains to machine guns, short or “sawed-off” shotguns and rifles, and so-called “destructive devices” (including grenades, mortars, rocket launchers, large projectiles, and other heavy ordnance). Acquisition of these weapons is subject to prior approval of the Attorney General, and federal registration is required for possession. Generally, a $200 tax is imposed upon each transfer or making of any Title II weapon.

With the reclassification of so called “Assault Rifles” and large capacity magazines to fall under Title II, the Federal Government can all but ban outright millions upon millions of guns.  Unless you expect Eric “we must brainwash people against guns” Holder or others of his ilk to be doling out approval for these weapons.

Can’t happen?  But it has…and relatively recently.  In 1994 during the Clinton Administration, the one that brought us the last so called “Assault” Weapons Ban, the USAS-12, Striker 12 and Streetsweeper shotguns were all reclassified requiring them to be registered, taxed and confiscated if approval wasn’t extended.

So, not only does Obama have the means to reclassify a whole slew of weapons that he deems unfit for private citizens, he even has a precedent to go off of.

I’m not saying that the sky is falling…i’m saying it has all ready crashed and now we have to fight to try and mitigate the damage as best we can.

One of the best ways to go about doing that is push your state into passing a Firearms Freedom Act.  Basically, any weapon that is made in the state and retained therein would not be regulated or fall under the purview of the Federal government since it isn’t involved in interstate commerce.

States rights vs Federal infringements.