Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Intergalactic Background Checks: Study shows this step to gun confiscation does not work as advertised

Published

on

Intergalactic Background Checks Study shows this step to gun confiscation does not work as advertise

We have already established that gun confiscation is the left’s final solution to the liberty problem, and from now on this will be the context for any of their proposals or utterances; when they demand, what I call, Intergalactic Background Checks (comprehensive, enhanced, universal, ‘common sense’ etc,); when they want to dictate the extent of our human rights with gun “reform.”

They are in reality demanding gun confiscation.

They have made their gun confiscation intentions quite clear in over 70 instances the past few years.  This is a staggering number given the multiplicative effect of syndication and reprints of these demands.  In light of this the left will no longer be afforded the benefit of the doubt.

Demands for gun confiscation In their own words:

First, we have a quote from Alison Aires, courtesy of Joe Huffman. For what she lacks in stature within the liberty-grabber community of the left, makes up a level of vehemence unmatched by most of her comrades.

Let me tell you how you *actually* get guns banned.

You use the f…….. data that the NSA has. You check membership in gun clubs, you check the surveillance footage to see who’s a regular at shooting ranges. You check the people who are associated with the NRA. You get yourself a good long list of the people in America who love guns.

And when you inevitably catch these f……..ers with banned material? You don’t haul them into a cushy prison. Once the gavel comes down, you haul their a….. into the town square or the main road or whatever the local equivalent is and you execute them. [Edited for language]

Washington Post: A gun-free society

Daily Kos: Yes conservatives, we want to take away your guns…

Euphemisms for government control of personal property

The left loves to come up with all kinds of new ways of depriving the people of their rights, with government control of personal property being no exception. I use ‘Intergalactic’ because when it comes to restricting freedom, why not do it everywhere? It also mocks the left’s self-styled moral superiority in asserting control over the universe at large. Besides, no one can ever know when a few rogue extra terrestrials might have their own version of operation fast and furious warping in a shipment of phased plasma rifles in the 40-watt range over the intergalactic border.

Most of the politicians of the liberty grabber kind have their own word for this unprecedented control over personal property. Hillary Clinton preferred the term “enhanced” background checks, presumably since one ‘enhances’ something when they make it better. For leftists, better always seems to mean a reduction in liberty for some odd reason. And others, like Rep. Nancy ‘slippery slope’ Pelosi (D-CA), used the term “common sense” background checks (a term which is not usually associated with her).

However, the peak in leftist mendacity has to be making reference to these as merely “background checks,” as though they haven’t existed for over 20 years. The implication being that no one will be safe without strict control of personal property and personal freedom.

A prime example was Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) who, like most leftists, wants to take whatever inch they get and push it a mile in controlling liberty. He spoke on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ in October 2017 about the infamous bump-stock ban. He viewed the ban as an initial move on gun control stating that Congress should mandate background checks for all gun purchases.

“That would be the clear next step,” Murphy said. “That should be our North Star.”

A severe restriction on freedom termed a “North Star? This from people who still have the nerve to claim they are Liberal. Too bad for the left that no matter what they are called these checks are useless.

A study found no change in firearm homicide or suicide rates in California 10 years after the enactment of comprehensive background check policies

Logic should tell everyone that these checks on liberty have no use, aside from fostering in the left’s final solution to the gun problem. Those intent on breaking the law will find a way of obtaining a weapon, no matter what the left has done to restrict our freedom.

A study from UC Davis Health confirmed this practical reality.

The study compared gun murder and suicide rates for 10 years after the ‘comprehensive’ background check had been put in place, with 32 control states that had not enacted these measures. They found that there was no difference in these rates before and after these restrictions on freedom had been enacted. In other words, there was no benefit in a little temporary safety for the cost of giving up essential liberty.

(SACRAMENTO) —A study of firearm homicide and suicide rates in the 10 years after California simultaneously mandated comprehensive background checks for nearly all firearm sales and a prohibition on gun purchase and possession for persons convicted of most violent misdemeanor crimes found no change in the rates of either cause of death from firearms through 2000.

The study, which posted online Oct. 12 as in press at the journal Annals of Epidemiology, was conducted by the Violence Prevention Research Program (VPRP) at UC Davis and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. It compared observed annual firearm homicide and suicide rates in California over 10 years following enactment of comprehensive background check and misdemeanor violence prohibition policies in 1991 with expected rates based on data from 32 control states that did not have these policies and did not implement other major firearm policies during the same time. 

The study found no net difference between firearm-related homicide rates before and during the 10 years after policy implementation. [emphasis mine]

Note that the bias towards liberty control with the subhead of the press release attempting to spin the results as being a factor of incomplete background-check records. But, that is leftism at its core, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Those Intergalactic checks on liberty didn’t work as advertised, so the leftist mindset is to further restrict freedom whether or not it makes a difference.

The Takeaway

The liberty-grabber left’s obsession with gun confiscation should be obvious to everyone, they would prefer that everyone else be reduced to the “Don Rickles” defense, as David Leach termed it.

Intergalactic Background Checks are just the latest step in restricting freedom. Besides not working as advertised, they have no lawful justification. Their own words on the subject have made this crystal clear – that is, they want government control of personal property so they can confiscate it later.

Facebook Comments
Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Gene Ralno

    December 1, 2018 at 4:04 pm

    Leftists want us to believe they dream of peace in our time and wish for total elimination of firearms from the planet. But they know it’s an impossible dream and just pretend to believe. I used to wonder why leftists saturate media outlets with soothing pleas for conversation instead of acting on their clear and ultimate goal of confiscation. I assumed they stopped short of the extreme because they know firearms owners won’t tolerate confiscation without unimaginable fury. Fact is leftists no longer will settle for controlling little things like bayonet lugs, ammunition taxes, bullet shapes and so on. That was just part of a common leftist flimflam.

    They abandoned compromise because they know the people have caught on to their little ruse. But they still must first have universal background checks that are impossible to regulate without universal registration. What they need first is background checks on transfers between mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, uncles, cousins, friends, and neighbors. They’re after inheritances, bequeathals, gifts and sales of inherited collections, however small they are. Those are the voters they hope to transform into dependents of the government.

    Leftists don’t give a hoot about criminals who don’t acquire firearms legally and don’t vote. They need universal registration because it fundamentally transforms 120 million owners into dependents. Once they know who the owners are, they’ll choose which of them are allowed to be licensed. It’s the consummate entitlement. The democrat party cannot survive without more than half the nation being dependent on the government. Leftists trade entitlements for votes. It’s the heart of their strategy.

    Citizens just becoming aware should open their minds to the fact that the U.S. is very lucky to have a hundred million legally armed citizens with 400 million firearms in private hands. They should recognize that these are the most peaceable, lawful people in our nation. Leftists need to look at our open borders, colossal drug trade, scarce law enforcement, timid prosecution, limited incarcerations, gang strength, mental defectives living at home and terrorists roaming the streets. Can anyone even imagine the unbridled carnage if the leftist goal of total confiscation were to be achieved?

    Every time you vote, think about this. Those who carry out mass murders fear armed citizens and it’s precisely why governments always disarm the governed before they purge the disobedient. Taken together, all the mass shooting deaths from nuts, felons, terrorists and illegal aliens, throughout history for the entire planet, is infinitesimal compared to the total number of civilian citizens murdered by governments. It’s the reason for our 2nd Amendment and throughout human history, it has been a very bad idea to allow any government to disarm its people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Why ‘Unpopular The Movie’ is so unpopular: It calls out false Christianity

Published

on

Why Unpopular The Movie is so unpopular It calls out false Christianity

YouTube is rife with faith-based teachings and movies that garner millions of views for inaccurate and often heretical teachings. That’s what’s most popular on social media today. Believers in the Bible have a hard enough time combating false religions and atheism. It’s even more challenging going against the poor teachings that are flooding western society, particularly on the internet.

The Bible never said it would be easy, especially in the end times.

One movie I came across by the grace of God (thank you, Twitter user Doreen Virtue) offered some of the most compelling 25-minutes of truth I’ve heard recently. Coincidentally, it came to my feed three days after I posted an article about a teaching by Pastor Paul Washer, who happens to be teaching in Unpopular The Movie as well.

We have before us a society that is bent on making Christianity as open-minded and all-inclusive as possible. It seems to our human understanding that this would make sense, but only because our human understanding is so far below the understanding of our Creator. He knows best. This is why Christianity is the only religion that goes against our natural sense of pride by declaring nothing in us is capable of helping us achieve salvation. We are dead. Our lives are only saved by the sacrifice of He who created us.

The notion of inclusion is a lazy way of not having to do as we’re commanded, to spread the Gospel message. It’s why the notion that Allah and God are the same is sinful, a topic we also recently covered as told by Naeem Fazal. There have certainly been a lot of coincidences lately.

Only through continuous repentance and ongoing belief in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior can we accept the undeserved gift of salvation. If you believe in a wide gate and a broad way, it’s time to watch this movie.

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

NZ Hate Preachers

Published

on

NZ Hate Preachers

Having worked with Kiwis for many, many years, and having followed events in En Zed for the last three decades, I was just as shocked and horrified as anyone about the horrific massacre of Muslims at Friday prayers at their mosques in Christchurch on March 15, 2019.

You can see my three contemporaneous articles here:

My immediate reaction was that this was an extreme anomaly. I had followed reports for years about New Zealanders traveling to the Middle East to participate in Islamic jihad. I was also aware that authorities had been concerned that terrorist groups were setting up shop and recruiting from within New Zealand.

At that time, I recollected a very detailed article from some years ago documenting this situation even as I watched Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern don the hijab, join the Islamic call to prayer and declare that her entire country stood in solidarity with the followers of Islam.

Since then the so-called Christchurch Call has been issued seeking world governments to impose censorship of anyone who speaks candidly and objectively about the threat of terrorism in the name of Islam. We here in the United States are fortunate that President Trump has seen through the thinly veiled imposition of censorship and refused to let our country be seduced.

You can read the entire article entitled “Preachers of Hate” by Ian Wishart. The online archive indicates a date of January 1, 1970, but the actual publication date was March 30, 2007. The article can also be read in the Australian Edition here.

After the Christchurch attack two months ago, the point I remembered most distinctly 12 years after first reading this article was that American Imam Siraj Wahhaj was one of the foreign Islamic Preachers of Hate who had visited New Zealand in years past and who had helped influence Muslims living in that South Pacific country.

His son of the same name has been tied to suspected terrorist training compounds in New Mexico and Alabama recently which were allegedly training potential school shooters. Whether the elder Imam Siraj Wahhaj is acknowledged as a mentor or not, his political philosophy most definitely represents that of new U.S. Congresswomen Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.

Following is the excerpt from the NZ Investigate Magazine article of March 30, 2007. FIANZ is the Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand.

SIRAJ WAHHAJ

Another Muslim scholar brought out to New Zealand in 2001 – just months before 9/11, was American convert Siraj Wahhaj, invited here by FIANZ. Wahhaj was once hailed as a “moderate” in the US, and became the first American Muslim to deliver the daily prayer in the US Congress, in 1991, as a recognition of his “moderate” views. But like Bilal Philips before him, Siraj Wahhaj was leading a double life: teacher’s pet moderate Muslim on the outside for the benefit of politicians and the media, die-hard radical extremist on the inside. Wikipedia records that Wahhaj was named by the US Department of Justice as another of several “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators in the attempt to blow up New York City monuments” including the World Trade Centre in 1993.

As Salon magazine reported on September 26, 2001, Wahhaj had a close relationship with an Islamic terrorist, the “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdul Rahman, inviting him to speak at Wahhaj’s Brooklyn mosque and even testifying as a character witness for Rahman in court.

Wahhaj, who like Philips slipped into New Zealand without opposition by the SIS, police or border security, is also quoted in Salon as calling the original Gulf War 1 – against Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait – “one of the most diabolical plots ever in the annals of history”, and “part of a larger plan, to destroy the greatest challenge to the Western world, and that’s Islam.”

Comparing the fall of Soviet Russia to the current crisis in the West, Wahhaj warned America too will be crushed unless it “accepts the Islamic agenda”.

Journalist Daniel Pipes, in The Danger Within, details a 1992 address Wahhaj gave to an audience of New Jersey Muslims.

“If only Muslims were more clever politically, he told his New Jersey listeners, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate. ‘If we were united and strong, we’d elect our own Emir [leader] and give allegiance to him…Take my word, if 6-8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us’.”

So that was Siraj Wahhaj’s agenda just a year after reading the opening prayer in the same US parliament he was hoping to overthrow, and he is welcomed as an esteemed speaker by moderate Muslims in New Zealand.

The website MilitantIslamMonitor.org has compiled its own research on Wahhaj.

“There’s no such thing as a Muslim having a non-Muslim friend”

“Wahhaj extolled the joys of martyrdom in this Jihad website entry, ‘No one who dies and goes to Paradise is going to want to come back to this world, except a Martyr, a person who gave their life for Islam, for Allah, they will want to come back to the earth and die ten more times in the way of Allah, because of the great gifts Allah has given them in Paradise’

“Wahhaj often writes and speaks on the subject of martyrdom in Islam. Some of his works are entitled: ‘Are you ready to die?’ ‘The blessing of Death’ ‘The easy way to Paradise – how to get there’.

“In addition to martyrdom Wahhaj is a proponent of polygamy and has produced many tapes on the subject.”

While the latter topic might fit Labour Party policy in New Zealand, it is doubtful Wahhaj’s commitment to military jihad would.

For his part, Wahhaj has told American media they’ve misunderstood him, that “Islam is a religion of peace”, and that he really is a moderate.

We here at NOQ Report highly recommend that authorities both in the United States and in New Zealand revisit these allegations that were documented a dozen years ago. Right now our friends in Aotearoa are understandably still in shock.

But we need to prevent anyone, particularly Wellington and other national capitals, from taking what happened in Christchurch out of context. It is also our urgent mission to ensure that warnings of a potential counterattack by a geographically-dispersed ISIS or other Islamic terrorist group in retribution are not censored.

To PM Ardern, I would say, take a deep breath and step back from the erroneous presumptions you have made in the aftermath of Christchurch. The seeds of discontent have already been sewn and the roots of an Islamic Insurgency already exist in your country’s soil.

Call in your intelligence community and consult with your counterparts in the United States and other allied countries. Back off from the Christchurch Call and all attempts to impose censorship.

If you were paying attention to what happened in Sri Lanka, if you are watching what is happening in Nigeria, if you focus your gaze beyond your own island nation, you will realize that Muslims are not always victims as they were at Christchurch.

Don’t let one horrific and unforgivable atrocity distort your view of reality and warp your perspective on what you must do in the future to keep Kiwis of every religion and ethnicity safe from harm.

I would enjoin our American government to move beyond some of our own political squabbles and consider how those who pose a threat to our own domestic security may also have their tentacles around our good friends in New Zealand and other close allies.

Agencies investigating the terror compounds in New Mexico and Alabama might want to put somebody on a plane or at least have a video conference with your counterparts in New Zealand. What were Siraj Wahhaj and other Islamic Preachers of Hate doing and with whom were they doing it as documented in the article from 2007?

We at NOQ Report will continue to do our utmost to put together pieces of the puzzle as they become available from open sources. Stay tuned for further developments.

SIRAJ WAHHAJ

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Love is often a one-way street between Evangelical Christians and Jews (and that’s okay)

Published

on

Love is often a one-way street between Evangelical Christians and Jews and thats okay

Jesus Christ was a Jew. The Apostles were Jews. Just about everyone who laid the groundwork for the Church were Jews. These facts above all else are why a good portion of Evangelical Christians love the Jews. The sentiment is often not mutual.

To understand why this is so and more importantly why it’s a perfectly acceptable form of unrequited love, one must look at the world from the perspective of the Jews. Here are a few things to remember:

  • Over the centuries, Jews have faced the greatest level of persecution of any religious group. Many times, these persecutions were done in the name of the church and at the hands of purported Christians.
  • If the Evangelical Christian view is correct, then that would mean the Jewish people have been wrong in their beliefs for 2,000 years. It would also mean that they were deeply involved in the crucifixion of their own Messiah. That’s a very hard pill for anyone to swallow.
  • Conversions are happening every day. Jews in and out of Israel are believing in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. This means that many friends and family members of orthodox Jews are switching to a religion that they believe is false. Who wouldn’t take offense to a religion that, in their opinion, is damning friends and family for eternity?

There are other reasons that many Jews hold onto that justify, in their opinion, negative sentiment towards Evangelical Christians.  It’s something that will likely not change until the truth is revealed to them and they say the words the Jesus Christ prophesied:

Luke 13:34-35

34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!

35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Nobody knows for sure why things have happened the way they have over the years. There are many doctrines that attempt to explain it all such as dispensationalism and replacement theology, but the truth is that we are incapable to know the true reasoning. Some have speculated that there needed to be this tension between Jews and Christians until the end when we all come together as believers at the Second Coming. It’s much like the understanding that Joseph went through when his brothers betrayed him. He had no way to know until God’s plan for him was fulfilled that the evil they did to him was done for the purpose of watering the seeds of the nation of Israel. While it was happening, while he was sold into slavery and betrayed by his own family, he must have had moments when he questioned God’s plan for him, but it became clear to him once all was said and done.

We are not to speculate about God’s motives. We are to spread His Word, pray always, worship and bless our Father, and love Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior with all our hearts. We are to boldly proclaim our love to all peoples and face the persecution that comes from it. That includes atheists, Muslims, Hindus, and people of all beliefs including Jews. They are our brothers and we must love them even if they do not return the same feelings.

As Ari Morgenstern points out in an article on the Jerusalem Post, bigotry towards Christians is the last acceptable form of religious prejudice in Israel. It’s a sign of the times, one that could mean more about things that will shortly come to pass than we could possibly know.

Had Joseph followed his flawed human heart, he would have hated his brothers for what they did to him. Instead, he loved them and knew that their actions were part of God’s plan. We must embrace the same mentality when we look to our Jewish brothers whether they want it or not.

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending