Banning Guns--It's in the Works Again

ht/PaxParabellum

We must be vigilant more than ever, and most of us are dozing--lulled by the Lightbringer's charisma that he wants only good things for us. We are dozing while our fundamental Constitutional rights are being eroded. We are dozing while our children's futures are being burdened by a debt so big it is really impossible to understand its true weight. While we are lulled into this complacency the first right most necessary to be taken away is our right to bear arms. Don't let them fool you into believing that the 2nd amendment was only for a militia and only for muskets. Our founding fathers understood all too well that when a country's citizenry is disarmed, the state can proceed to persecute who they see fit.

Here's the gun-ban list that is proposed. It's in a bill that has been penned and just waiting for the right number of democrats to get it passed, and then we are all at the mercy of our government no matter how many people are arrested and jailed for whatever offense our government deems necessary.

Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):

Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
AR-15,
Bushmaster XM15,
Armalite M15,
AR-10,
Thompson 1927,
Thompson M1;
AK,
AKM,
AKS,
AK-47,
AK-74,
ARM,
MAK90,
NHM 90,
NHM 91,
SA 85,
SA 93,
VEPR;
Olympic Arms PCR;
AR70,
Calico Liberty ,
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
Fabrique National FN/FAL,
FN/LAR, or FNC,
Hi-Point20Carbine,
HK-91,
HK-93,
HK-94,
HK-PSG-1,
Thompson 1927 Commando,
Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
Saiga,
SAR-8,
SAR-4800,
SKS with detachable magazine,
SLG 95,
SLR 95 or 96,
Steyr AU,
Tavor,
Uzi,
Galil and Uzi Sporter,
Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110,
MAC-10,
MAC-11, or MPA3,
Olympic Arms OA,
TEC-9,
TEC-DC9,
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
Uzi.
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG,
SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
Striker 12,
Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see
below),
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than
10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).
A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a
detachable magazine, and has:
(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10
rounds.
A semiautomatic shotgun with:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity
of more than 5 rounds, and
(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.
Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”

Get involved. Write your representatives. Join a gun rights group. Here's a partial list:

Gun Owners of America
http://gunowners.org/

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
http://www.jpfo.org/

FREEDOM=GUNS
http://www.tcsn.net/doncicci/freedom.htm

National Rifle Association
http://www.nra.org/

Second Amendment Committee
http://www.libertygunrights.com/

Second Amendment Foundation
http://www.saf.org/

Second Amendment Sisters
http://www.2asisters.org/

Women Against Gun Control
http://www.wagc.com/

Gun Control and Tony Martin

This is an email I got a few days ago:

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door.
Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.
At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way.
With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your
shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door
and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder
brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast
knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second
man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the
telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few That
are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them
useless. Yours was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that
the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and
Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he
tells you not to worry authorities will probably plea the case down to
manslaughter.

"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave
yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper.
Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men
you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't
find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article,
authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous
times.

But the next day's headline says it all "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't
Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals
into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes
wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The
surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll
probably win. The media publishes reports that your home has been
burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of
local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects.
After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be
prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you
were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced,
as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand,
your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors
paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for
the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life
in prison.

This case really happened............

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk, England, killed one
burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is
now serving a life term. [the sentence was reduced to manslaughter when
Tony appealed with a claim of a mental disorder, and he was released July 2003.
The two that robbed Martin had 62 convictions between them. The one that
Martin killed was 16].

How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great
British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law
forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun
sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act
of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms
except shotguns.

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon
by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the
Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed Man
with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he
saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun
control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all
privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a
rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane, Scotland, Thomas Hamilton used a
semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public
school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally
unstable, or worse, criminals.

Now the press had a real hook with which to beat up law-abiding gun
owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense
of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane
Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearm still
owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took
Away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed
self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to
grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that
self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens
who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real
criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as
saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several
elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had
no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques,
had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given
three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British
subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by
police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't
comply. Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns
from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been
registered and licensed Kinda like cars.

Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA , THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND
AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION

"...it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
Samuel Adams

Denny Crane and Gun Control

ht/Pax Parabellum

You gotta love Denny Crane. He is always so succinct: knee, right foot, left foot.