I was born in Worcester Massachusetts, but now reside near Nashville Tennessee. I paid $100 for a STATE APPROVED gun safety course required for a handgun carry permit in the state of Tennessee, & then an additional $115 to the State of Tennessee’s Dept. of Safety, as well as being fingerprinted (every digit) & having my handgun model recorded by officials.
Yet somehow If I want to return to my home state of 36 years, where I was born, I will now have to disarm & leave my personal defense weapon at home. Yes that’s right. I can drive a 2 ton weapon into the state of Massachusetts on my Tennessee drivers license, while across this country’s automobiles are the number one thing that kills & often dismember our nations teenagers, yet I will be stopped at the border &/or probably arrested if I bring my firearm into Massachusetts, even though I have paid my due. Of course I do have the unreasonable option of paying to fly into Massachusetts, paying for taking a second redundant hand course safety course approved by THAT State to the tune of another $100 & a couple of days of my time, & then paying Massachusetts for a hand gun carry permit.
Since I’ve already paid here in Tennessee, that would of course constitute Governmental “double dipping”. Also, while I am in the process, I will be there with no self defense weapon, & fully vulnerable to armed thugs in Massachusetts who unlike me, HAVE been arrested before. Or wait! Do I really have that option? Or do I have to be a resident? So far I haven’t been able to get a straight answer anywhere. This description on eHow.com seems to point to a very “over complicated” process that is designed to discourage my right to bear arms. In part is reads: “You will be required to justify your request in writing. Make your request as detailed and specific as possible. Valid reasons for requesting a concealed handgun include personal threats, being in a high-risk profession or routinely carrying large amounts of cash.”
Oh really? Not according to the recent Supreme Court Ruling in Heller Vs. The District of Columbia since the core holding in D.C. v. Heller is that the Second Amendment is an individual right intimately tied to the natural right of self-defense. Do not criminals shoot people in the streets? Do I not have a right to protect myself in Massachusetts under the Supreme Court Ruling? Or will we have no consistency in our country with regards to citizens rights under the Constitution?
As it stands I can’t go home while maintaining my 2nd amendment right to protect myself, under any circumstances. Yes, that is right. I cannot return to the place of my birth unless I give up my some of my constitutional rights. So what I need is a lawyer who is willing to help me to either mediate a reciprocity agreement with the state of Massachusetts, or to sue for one, to protect my second amendment rights. I am a citizen of the United States, & as far as I know, I should enjoy the same rights under the US Constitution in Massachusetts, as I do in Tennessee. This is not currently the case however.
The framers of our constitution believed that Americans possessed a natural right of self defense, which no government could abrogate. Now mine & others rights are being abrogated, in that we may not return to my own home state unless we give up our right to self defense with an implement that has clearly been deemed reasonable by the highest court of the United States of America, a hand gun.
I am anxious to hear from any natives of Massachusetts who have moved away, & face the same problem as I do. For the purposes of this article, I will call you “those of duel citizenship” since Massachusetts now treats us as if we are entering the state as foreigners. Please contact me if you are interested in supporting my effort to have my legally obtained hand gun permit duly recognized starting in my home state, as well as eventually extending to anywhere else that my constitutional rights are protected. As far as I know, that should be any U.S territory.
*Update* 7/29/08 Passing This Legislation would make all of our lives much easier, save tax payer money for legal costs to the states, & protect our Constitutional Rights.
Please Send me some mail! if you would like to help.
Plain Text (cut & paste) info@danleereport.com
Dick Heller is the man who brought a much needed lawsuit against DC, to lift the unconstitutional handgun ban that has threatened the personal safety of it’s citizens for years.
Webster’s Dictionary defines a “machine gun” as the following:
Main Entry: machine gun
Function: noun
Date: 1867
:a gun for sustained rapid fire that uses bullets; broadly : an automatic weapon
Sustained rapid fire with seven rounds??? Doesn’t sound like Heller’s pistol even comes close to qualifying as a “machine gun” to me.. Clearly the DC moonbats had long ago gotten away with taking it upon themselves to break away from societal standards (such as the trusted Merriam Webster dictionary) to completely & arbitrarily redefine what a “machine gun” actually is.
The problem is that their little games will lead to more court cases to define the obvious for them, & it will be at the expense of the taxpayers. Meanwhile, the liberal media will black the stories out, & most of the public will never know that DC is wasting their money on trying to deny the Constitutional rights of it’s own citizens, unless people start to speak up for their rights.
Remember in November.. REMEMBER come November.. ~ Dan Lee
Liberals seem to never run out of ways to be stupid. Seriously, they think they can stop gun owners from carrying a lot of firepower by banning Semi-Autos?
Like most things the Democrats do, it makes no sense, but that’s not stopping the fascist anti-gun nuts in the Washington D.C. government from trying to impose more unconstitutional laws on citizens. Of course it will backfire in their face when people start carrying a revolver on each hip just like the old west, & speed loaders to make up for the low ammo capacity of revolvers..
They will also carry larger caliber/more deadly weapons to make sure that 6 bullets is enough to stop an attacker..
Go ahead D.C., ban them.. I’m sure there are plenty of people who are just waiting for a good excuse to get one of these:
However wonderful this may seem for the manufacturers of revolvers, I don’t think the D.C. anti-gun loons have thought this through long enough, & I’m not the only one.. My guess is that they’ll have an epiphany any day now & realize how incredibly dumb they are to even suggest a semi-auto ban.. If they continue with this talk, they will be seriously embarrassed in the end.
The Department of Justice has a program (at least in South Carolina), called the “Cease Fire” project..
Sounds like a good thing if it helps prevent gun crimes. HOWEVER, ahem.. On their website, they have a very ominous poster that is not very constitutional in my opinion as an educated U.S. born citizen. In fact it’s wording is a bit scary to say the least.
I have just a little teensy weensy question though..
Since when does a broken tail light alone lead to probable cause for a search of a person’s trunk?
Or is law enforcement doing courtesy tail light bulb changes that we didn’t know about?
As a legal gun owner & advocate, I don’t want people having guns illegally either, but at the same time, DUE PROCESS is imperative to our Constitutional rights. Although motor vehicles have “less” protection under the fourth amendment, they are still protected against illegal or harassing searches. A broken tail light alone certainly does not justify rifling through a citizens trunk, or vehicle. Once police have validly stopped a vehicle, they “may”, based on articulable facts warranting a reasonable belief that weapons may be present, conduct a Terry-type protective search of those portions of the passenger compartment in which a weapon could be placed or hidden. The poster I linked should be changed to reflect a respect for constitutionality in law, & due process.
Founded on the web circa 25-Apr-05 The so called American Hunters & Shooters Association is a dishonest organization, that curiously popped up right after the 2004 Presidential election loss of the Democrats. This Johnny come lately organization has been critical of the NRA, despite their glaringly obvious lack of tenure or credibility on Gun rights or Hunting issues.
One needs not look farther than their “Who We Are” to find the inconsistency & dishonesty of this organization. In this section of their website, they make the following statements. A simple look at the survey they refer to, reveals that the survey said no such thing about Assault Rifles or Bullets. I suppose they are counting on people’s laziness in not actually reading the survey. That’s a typical elitist liberal response, & usually their downfall incidentally. Contrary to their delusion, REAL gun rights advocates are concerned with more than chewing tobacco & 4 wheel drive trucks. We do in fact read between the lines.
According to a 2003 Field & Stream National Hunting Survey, sportsmen overwhelmingly support reasonable gun safety proposals. Moreover, an overwhelming majority of hunters support proposals like background checks to purchase guns, keeping military style assault weapons off our streets and the elimination of cop killer bullets.
There a was only actually one question on the survey that was relevant in any way to the claims made above in the “Who We Are” section of the American Hunters & Shooters Association website.
15. Do you consider assault-style rifles to be legitimate sporting guns?
67% No
33% Yes
As you can see, this question & it’s responses have NOTHING to do with getting assault rifles off of the street. The question only addresses the relevancy of the assault rifle as a sporting gun.
Nowhere in the survey are the readers asked whether or not the assault rifle is a legitimate self defense gun, yet on the website, they try to spin the question & response to mean that Hunters don’t think anyone should own an assault rifle. They were asked about it for hunting, not self defense.
This website/organization is clearly & deviously bending the truth for their own political agenda.
Furthermore, nowhere in the survey were “Cop Killing” bullets mentioned, or asked about.
Secondly, if we were as citizens eventually subject to a government agency who went completely bonkers, why would we want them to be the only ones with access to armor piercing rounds?
This would also of course be a completely fascist position for any Gun owner/advocate to take, because the second amendment guarantees us the right to own any type of rifle, or ammunition we want. Whereas the Second Amendment includes the phrase; “being necessary to the security of a free State“, it’s clearly addressing our right to have sufficient firepower to protect ourselves against the rise of a fascist Government.
The authors of this website are trying to slowly disarm us, by giving you a couple Hershey kisses, & then stealing your King sized Hershey Bar (with almonds), while you sleep.
Don’t fall for it! They are a Johnny come lately political front, who will change their tune as soon as they & the Democrats have enough power to have a sing along.
I have just given you a clear example of this organization twisting, no correction MANGLING, the truth, in the most crafty ways imaginable. On certain parts of their website, they claim that they do not agree with the Hand Gun prohibitions in D.C. & Chicago ect.. This too is a crafty tactic. Why? Let me explain.
They know that hand guns are essentially ineffective beyond 50 feet or so, (150 ft. if you’re weapon uses the higher velocity rounds, & you have a horseshoe up your @$$) whereas an assault rifle has an effective range of as far as 2000 feet. So if they concede everyone the right to own a hand gun, then they could keep the really effective weapons in the hands of the Government, (assault rifles) & out of the hands of the people. What are we supposed to do, defend the republic against a rogue government/regime with pistols against these weapons? Oh that’s rich…
This is a very devious & crafty strategy, especially knowing how the handgun free zones are turning out to be a joke (VT shootings,D.C./Chicago gun crime rate still high, a Supreme Court defeat looming for Anti-hand gun proponents.) They know they are about to lose the handgun battle on constitutional grounds, but now they are (almost) ok with that, because they know you can’t fight a rogue Police state with handguns, & after all, it’s mostly inner city people they don’t really care about killing themselves with them. These are voters they can replace at the current child illegitimacy rate in their minds. So now they are trying to convince people that assault rifles are bad, (as if they bounce around on their stock & randomly murder people on their own.)
DO NOT be Fooled. Do your family a favor, & own an assault rifle, before these nuts have a chance to deprive you of your right to self protection through their cloak & dagger schemes. Also, keep your membership with the NRA, or get one. There’s a reason behind why these idiots keep attacking the NRA. They are trying to undermine the REAL GUN RIGHTS ADVOCATES.
“The NRA is extreme,” says Ray Schoenke, the former Washington Redskins lineman and failed Democratic candidate for governor of Maryland who is president of the American Hunters and Shooters Association. Schoenke also previously made a $5,000 donation to Handgun Control Inc., predecessor to the main anti-gun lobby, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
Be sure to read up on this guy carefully. He’s an anti-gun hypnotist, plain & simple. Ask yourself this: After Barack Hussein Obama’s “Clinging to Guns & Bibles” remarks about small town America, why in hell would any REAL pro-gun rights group endorse him?
Oh, & for anyone who thinks they can successfully criticize me as an paranoid about our Government, Just remember that those who forget the harsh lessons of History are bound to repeat them.
Obviously the Chicago “Gun Ban” still doesn’t mean anything to criminals, & it isn’t helping to stem the tide of violence in the city. Instead of only evil or morally confused people having guns, responsible citizens should have them also, that way the criminals never know who will take them down if they try to shoot anyone else in the citizenship. We know that criminals will always find a way to get guns, just like drugs. Even legal drugs are abused by a few, compared to the millions who use them for their intended treatments or purposes. Should we ban all pain killers then? Make good law abiding people suffer severe pain, because a few idiots abuse prescription drugs?
A half baked quote from The Superintendent of the Chicago Police:
“There are just too many weapons here,” the superintendent, Jody P. Weis, said at a news conference. “Too many guns, too many gangs.”
Well that’s about half right… Guns don’t go off without a homicidal idiot behind them. How about cleaning out the gangs?
Like I’ve said before, this just proves that politicians have been on the wrong track with imposing gun bans. These handgun bans haven’t done anything to stop crime in D.C., or in Chicago, & that’s now become an irrefutable fact.
When only criminals have guns, only innocent people get shot or victimized. That is an injustice, & a crime against humanity in of itself. That is also why our forefathers instituted the second amendment.
In fairness, Superintendent Weis eventually went on to touch on the real crux of the matter:
“We’ve got to get children back into being children,” Superintendent Weis said. “Not cold-blooded killers. Law enforcement cannot replace parents. Parents have to take a very aggressive role.”
That’s right Chicago.. If you take every gun off the planet, & have bad parental guidance for children, they will sharpen sticks, plastic, & butter knives to stab each other to death with if they have to.
Well before I start, I want to say that I’m very sad for the families & victims of Seung-Hui Cho. It is one of those tragedies that none of us will ever forget.
However it’s also my responsibility to expose the truth wherever the gun hating leftist media in our country will not. The truth is, what ended up being a 1 against 32 slaughter, could have been much different if a few students & faculty were allowed to defend themselves against an attacker. Even a handful of trained & lethally armed security guards would have cut the carnage down significantly. Logic dictates that if a few responsible individuals trained to use a firearm were present, Cho would have been taken down, or at least chased off before he could kill more than perhaps 5 or 10 people. But all those things were against the “Campus Rules”. Rules that people like Seung-Hui Cho will never follow.
But on this day one year ago, Viginia Tech was a campus completely owned & operated for all practical purposes by Seung-Hui Cho. He was the rule of law. He was the purveyor of twisted justice in his own mind, & because he was the only one who had the firepower to enforce it, it went exactly how he planned it. He was judge, jury, & executioner.
Anti gun proponents like Thom Mannard, president of States United to Prevent Gun Violence, will tell us bold face lies by saying that; “What never really seems to occur is a real, thorough discussion on the fact that often the only common denominator in these tragedies is the use of guns. There is no other weapon that is legally available that can kill so many in such a short period of time. It’s amazing that more people don’t make that simple acknowledgment.”
What’s amazing to me Mr. Thom Mannard, is that you left out these other common demominators in these tragedies; The Immorality of the perpetrator(s), their Rage, their Malice, & often times their mental illness, substance abuse, & alcoholism.. Just a few little details you forgot to mention hmmm?
He also said this: “How many innocent victims must we lose on college campuses, in shopping malls, city halls and other public places before we say this is enough and start to discuss the role that guns are playing in all these tragedies,” Mannard continued. “We can no longer avoid the fact that guns are the common denominator in all these events, and that guns are the only type of weapon legally available in this country that can kill so many people in such a short period of time.
New Hybrid vehicles have almost zero operational noise, making it a stealth weapon, even with the coming “noise makers” to protect blind pedestrains added to them. Those “safety features” will of course be easily defeated by crafty car owners & modders who are bitter over buying a car that could be quieter. One could drive a vehicle like that through or around barricades & take out 20- 30 parade goers or first night celebration attendees in a blink of an eye. That’s with out first loading the vehicle up with large metal gasoline containers wrapped with sheets of automatic nail gun nails, & igniting those when the perpetrator gets into the crowd. The car, the Gasoline, the nails, the automotive spark plug, & spark plug wire are all readily available to anyone who wants them. So only two conclusions remain, either Thom Mannard is a very naive soul, or he’s a liar with an anti-gun & second amendment agenda. Are we going to ban all Home improvement items too?
From the National the Centers for Disease Control:
In 2004, poisoning deaths exceeded those related to firearms by 2%; however, the difference increased to 7% in 2005, with 32,691 poisoning deaths compared with 30,694 firearm deaths. Motor vehicle traffic (MVT) deaths were the leading cause of injury death from 1999-2005, accounting for 43,667 deaths in 2005. From 2004 to 2005, MVT deaths increased 1%, firearm deaths, 4% and poisoning deaths, 8%. (1,2)
Much of the poisoning is related to drug abuse by the way.
Number of Death in Population by Motor Vehicles between 1999 & 2005: 268,732
So here’s my question to people like Thom Mannard. Since the U.S. constitution specifically guarantees our right to bear arms (most legal scholars believe the Supreme court will confirm & uphold that fact this summer), but the constitution does not specifically guarantee our right to own say a wagon or a horse, which is what they had back then when they wrote it, why then aren’t you trying to stop us from driving the automobile which is statistically proven to be more deadly than the gun?
A Podium Vs. a Gun
Erin Sheehan was a freshman last year when the shooting happened. She was overlooked by the gunman during the shooting because she “played dead”. After that, she had the unfortunate task of trying to keep him out, armed with only a piece of wooden furniture. She’s been quoted as saying the following:
“I tried to use a podium at the front of the classroom to block the door, because the gunman was shoving at the door and started firing through the door. We didn’t think we were going to be able to hold it.”
I strongly commend Erin for her bravery in trying to do at least “something” in the face of danger, but I think it’s safe to say that she was one of many fish being shot at in a barrel, & she was trying to protect herself by pulling only a wooden lid over it, instead of doing what we regularly have our police & military do when enemies attack, SHOOT BACK! This is because of the irresponsible & just plain neurotic demands by the liberal college administrations around the country, that students & faculty walk around in a fantasy world where gun bans will keep criminals from getting or using weapons. The truth is, he could have walked into that same classroom with a well constructed pipe bomb full of nuts bolts ect, & killed as many people. He could even have thrown one through the window, & then moved to another area to do the same. It’s not the guns that are the problem, it’s the break down of morality in a society that has submitted to liberal democratic rule, & principles, instead of the principles of the Republic it once was.
I’ve had guns at my disposal for a greater part of my life, but yet I’ve never come close to shooting anyone. However, you can bet that if I were near the college the day that Seung-Hui Cho was there & heard shooting & screaming, I would have hunted him down & shot him to stop him from hurting anymore people. Gun ban or not, my Pistol would have gone with me, & common sense & the spirit of the law would have at the moment overruled the “form” of the law.
This is not rocket science people. It’s common sense, & it’s not that hard to understand if you take the time to read through the facts that could save your life.
While wussey little college administrators are pontificating to the rest of us about what we can & can’t do to protect ourselves, they are putting peoples lives at risk to build a political reality for themselves. That would be a fascist state of rule where they can control the masses, & dangle your safety in front of you like a carrot in front of a cold hungry & scared little bunny who needs their protection to survive. Remember, when the nearest cop is 15 minutes away, most colleges will have you out in the open halls of a classroom, while the administrators are safely locked behind pass code/card swiped doors. How many college administrators, board members ect. were killed during the rampages at VT & NIU? None? e-mail me if I’m wrong & I’ll make the correction, but suffice to say it was significantly lower than the students they disarmed & marched out onto the front lines of the real world.
Well last year, they didn’t protect you, now did they? Yeah sure, leave it up to the Dean who always has the option of locking the thick hardwood oak door to his/her office, & hiding under their desk until police arrive with GUNS to save them. It makes me sick.. Weapons will never go away, nor will evil on earth. When will these people stop living a fantasy, & allow people to protect themselves from harm? The government, bureaucracies, & certainly your college administrators can’t protect you. I don’t think anyone can seriously argue that this has been conclusively proven over the last few years, at colleges & even high schools across America. ~Dan Lee
Barack said then:
Years of abandonment by successive Clinton and Bush administrations have made the people of small town Pennsylvania so “bitter” they “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them”.
Barack says now:
“I am amused about this notion of elitist, given that when you’re raised by a single mom, when you’re on food stamps for a while when you were growing up, you went to school on scholarship….”
“So when somebody makes that argument, particularly given that I spent my entire life working with workers, low-income communities to try to make people’s lives a little bit better, then that’s when you know we’re in political silly season.”
Dan Lee says:
So you’re “amused” that people are dumb enough to think your an elitist huh? Wouldn’t that be the kind of reaction an elitist might have? Amusement at the percieved stupiditiy of others that might believe you’re an elitist? Have you considered that maybe they are right based on your reaction?
Here’s your free clue Mr. Obama:
When they called you an “elitist” they weren’t talking about back when you were a schoolboy, they are talking about what you have become.. In other words, what you are RIGHT NOW.”
P.S. I will personally admit that I am an “elitist” of sorts, because I believe that Conservatives are far superior in almost every way to Liberals. That is unless you’re looking for a politician who can increase the Government’s tax revenue, & the people’s tax burden. In that case they have us beat with one hand tied behind their backs. I do however believe that our elite status is subject & subservient to almighty God, who is the King of the elite, & the King of Kings.
But them I’m probably clinging to “religion” too much in Obama’s opinion.. Egads!!! We’re sorry King Barack Hussein Obama!! Not…
When I was a kid, (Not really all that long ago), it was not unusual for us to get a little bored in class, & then draw a picture of a little stick figure holding a gun, & shooting the proverbial “bad guy”. Our teachers then, whether they agreed or not, respected our first amendment right to express ourselves in any way we wanted to, as long as it wasn’t physically violent or disruptive. Now, if a child draws a picture of even just a gun, or even a squirt gun, you have fascist liberal teachers dragging children down to the principles office to suspend them.
That is nothing short of indoctrination into someone else’s political & social views, & these days if YOUR child doesn’t comply, they face punishments & sanctions.
Of course sane people know that a drawing of a gun, or a depiction of a violent act is not necessarily a bad thing, but rather for some kids a way to express & process what goes on in the world around them. I was one of those creative kids. As I was growing up, I was eventually in possession of real guns, & still do have real guns & ammunition, yet I’ve never even come close to shooting anyone.. Guns are no different than cars. If you point them at a person, & either pull the trigger or run them over, they may die. It’s that simple. Yet liberals try to demonize the possession of guns as they drive around in their deadly little silver boxes. Well like for instance Al Gore’s son, who was arrested in his Toyota Prius doing 100 mph, with pot smoke billowing out the windows. Clue: Pot smoke is bad for the environment, & even a Prius will cause pollution at 100 mph, but I digress..
The point is, children are being taught in public schools that guns are bad. Yet liberals leave cars alone, (even though they are one of the true leading killers of people in America & beyond) because they drive those themselves & at least at this stage, know better than to go there with the public. They are selectively wussifying our children, in order to indoctrinate them into their way of twisted thinking. Many schools are dropping playground activities like tag, dodge ball, ect.. because well.. “children could be hurt”, & even getting rid of grades claiming that the grading system only serves to damage their self confidence.
There’s a war INSIDE our country people, & it’s only going to get worse if we keep electing Democrats into office. That’s the bottom line. Democrat politics are flawed by always going with the flow of even the angriest & senseless whims of any mob of activists that happen to fall together.
“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
“An empire is a despotism,” wrote Adams, “and an emperor is a despot, bound by no law or limitation but his own will.”
-John Adams
As you can see from things like Teachers Unions (for instance) Adams was right. They have no problem with imposing their own will on our children, & thus trying to cement their twisted form of government for our future into the minds of children. That’s why teacher’s unions hate homeschooling. They can’t get their grubby little ideologies into your kids heads if they can’t get to them. A Great Example Here. They do this by ensuring a liberal voting base through this devious form of systematic brainwashing. It’s vitally important for our survival as a nation, that you don’t let these people raise & wussify your children. After all, at some point these teachers actually have more time with them than YOU DO.
THAT fact, is some serious food for thought! ~Dan Lee
And later that month:
“I think it’s important for us to recognize that we’ve got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respects the Second Amendment and people’s traditions.”
Then on the Anniversary of the VT shootings. (You know the one wear the students,staff & faculty were like “fish in a barrel” because only the shooter ignored the no gun rule?) He said the following:
“I am not in favor of concealed weapons,” Obama told the Pittsburgh Tribune.“I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.” Hmmm… Like at VT Barack? One gun in the right hands could have ended it before so many were killed, & that’s an irrefutable fact
Hmm, let us see here.. Should we vote for a President that doesn’t believe in the 2nd Amendment of the US Consititution, which the tenants thereof made this nation strong & free?
Should only the Police & Government officials have the guns, & if they do, who’s to stop them from abusing the rest of us & treating us like their peasants, slaves, & minions?
Looks like Mr. Barack Hussein Obama is on the wrong side of the issue with the American People. Or maybe he just wants to control everyone eventually? Adolf Hitler started by taking all the public’s weapons away.. Then he started systematically murdering those he didn’t like. I’d hate to compare Obama to Hitler unfairly, but as a Tiger walks out from the shade, into the sunlight, we identify him by the pattern we see, & compare that pattern to a known creature to identify the one before us in our minds.. Taking guns out of the hands of citizens, & violating our constitutional rights would be a pattern that is also familiar to us. It’s the pattern that a tyranny follows.
The former Soviet Union, the citizens of China, the citizens of the Cambodians under Pol-Pot, the Kosovars under the Serbs, the Weimar assembly’s efforts in 1925 to pass the German National Gun Registration Act, then helped to pass the National Security Act of 1929. The 1929 Act required all Germans, and especially Jews, to turn in all guns or rifles they owned to the authorities. Through their efforts in the Weimar Assembly, these men helped remove all guns owned by German citizens and Jews, thereby helping us make a more secure Germany, a more peaceful Germany. That made it easy for German police and security forces to enforce the dictatorship of the nation without resistance by groups who opposed Hitler’s laws.
This is of course why Charlon Heston made the famous statement; “From my cold dead hands.” He also predicted new gun laws wouldn’t solve crime in 1989. He was of course right in retrospect.
Watch his prophetic words in the following video:
From my cold dead hands too..
Important Disclaimer: By agreeing with Charlton Heston on his famous “From my cold dead hands” statement, I’m not advocating that you should necessarily engage in a firefight with Police who want to take your weapon(s) away. The only thing that would ever justify that circumstance, would be if the US Government went completely bonkers, & decided that they were going to take “EVERYONE’S” guns away.
It is suicidal & immoral to have a shootout with Police over the possession or confiscation of a few personal firearms, when one knows they have access to a fair court hearing. Don’t do it!
The majority of policemen in this country still believe in the second amendment, & the right of citizens to responsibly carry a firearm!Don’t make them the enemy unnecessarily, because as of this time in our country, they simply are not. If a Police officer asks you to surrender your firearm over a misunderstanding, or for the protection of everyone involved, follow his/her instructions, & contact an attorney without answering any questions, other than providing proof that you have the right to own the weapons (licenses ect.) Don’t be stupid, & live to fight another day. We’re not living under tyranny (yet). ~ Dan Lee
Jimmy Naifeh once again deciding for everyone, & making sure he can pressure gun owners/advocates with passive aggressive tactics.
Yes, he may have the power to pull underhanded political maneuvers that slap law abiding gun owners in the face, but obviously it’s an abuse of his power.
The Tennessean in Nashville and The Roanoke Times in Virginia. Both published online searchable databases of gun-permit holders last year, before quickly removing the data. In Roanoke’s case, it published the names and home addresses of law enforcement officers and judges.
It was a stupid & dangerous act. (As you read on, you’ll see that there’s a theme with stupid & dangerous Democrats.)
If medical records can be kept private to protect people from discrimination, then why can’t one’s gun permit status be also? Will employers start using this to discriminate against those who legally own & carry a firearm, just because someone in management is anti-gun?
That is unfortunately a real possiblity. Of course that’s exactly what anti-gun moonbats like Neifeh are hoping for. This is not the first time Naifeh has taken a shot at gun owners in Tennessee, & it won’t be the last unless you vote him out. He’s a political loose cannon, & of course he has armed security himself, & they can take their guns anywhere he asks them to. He also opposed legislation that would effectively let Iraq war vets who need mental health treatment renew their hand gun permits.
Rep. Nathan Vaughn, D-Kingsport, said the NRA contacted him about sponsoring the bill, and he thought it made sense.
“A lot of folks who are going into Iraq are coming back, and there is some period of adjustment. … Some of the folks are saying ‘I know if I have to get some mental health treatment, I’m not going to be eligible to continue my handgun carry permit,’” Vaughn said. “It’s just kind of tragic. … They are out there fighting for this country, and all kinds of negative things are happening to them when they come back home. We need to be doing more to help them. … We’re afraid that honest people just ought not have guns, that somehow only criminals ought to be the ones to have guns, and I just think that’s wrong.”
Effectively, this is what Naifeh has conveyed to returning Iraq War Veterans:
“Thank you for fighting for our, & getting mentally & physically wounded in the process. Now give me your gun & call the cops if someone tries to carjack you & shoot you on the way to your therapy sessions, ok?.”
The House Criminal Practice and Procedure Subcommittee has more Democratic lawmakers than Republicans. House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh, D-Covington, was also in Wednesday’s subcommittee meeting considering several pieces of handgun legislation, including Vaughn’s. Naifeh can cast votes in any subcommittee or committee meeting.
All of those bills failed, thanks to his abusive pontifications.
The meeting began with a Comedy Central video, introduced by state
