Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Over half of Colorado county sheriffs say they won’t comply with unconstitutional state gun grab bill

Published

on

Gun Confiscation SWATing is all the rage with the Liberty Grabber Left and RINO’s. MRCTV profiles CO sheriffs standing up for Liberty.

There are many deep philosophical reasons to oppose Gun Confiscation SWATing [aka ERPO, ‘Red Flag’ laws]. This is why a number of Colorado sheriffs are opposing these constitutionally abhorrent measures and are willing to put their freedom on the line to do so. In this video from a few days ago, Gardner Goldsmith, of MRCTV fame details how these lawmen of the state are standing up for freedom and our civil Liberties.

These unnecessary laws have already lead to the death of an innocent man in Maryland. The fact is that Gun Confiscation SWATing is an unconstitutional solution to a non-existent problem.  Now, RINOs are getting into the act, with Lindsey Graham harming the 2nd Amendment supporting these laws. But let us check some of the worst aspects of these laws:

The outright Lie that these laws are ‘urgently’ needed

Existing laws on involuntary civil commitment already cover situations where someone may be a danger to themselves and others. For example, in the Parkland case, the perpetrator could have been confined under “The Florida Mental Health Act” or “The Baker Act.”

These laws do not work as advertised

New research from Dr. John Lott and Professor Carl Moody indicated that these laws had no significant effect on murder, suicide, the number of people killed in mass public shootings, robbery, aggravated assault, or burglary. There is some evidence that rape rates rise. These laws apparently do not save lives.

Gun Confiscation SWATing – the perfect tool for extortion or revenge

The founding fathers had a very good reason to consider due process and the presumption of innocence to be vitally important. This is why they set a high bar for criminal charges or punishment. Gun Confiscation SWATing turns that on it’s head with punishment first, then ‘due process’, never mind about any criminal charges.

Going underground – the unintended consequences of Gun Confiscation SWATing

The Liberty grabber Left has the misguided notion that societal problems are but one tweak away from a grand solution. They neglect considerations of how certain people will react to these laws. Those prone to these kind of acts will quickly learn to hide their intentions and means to carry out their plans, making it far more difficult to detect those who may harm themselves or others. Thus, instead of keeping everyone safe, it will have the opposite effect.

Those bent on harming themselves will not seek out any help, lest their potential plans be interrupted. Others in the planing stages of mass murder will seek to hide their tools of mass murder so they cannot be confiscated, as will everyone else. Thus instead of Gun Confiscation SWATing being a constitutionally abhorrent tweak to Liberty rendering everyone safe and happy. It will force many underground along with everyone else afraid that their hard-earned property will be taken at the point of a gun.

Gun Confiscation SWATing violates multiple civil Liberties

As detailed in the video, Gun Confiscation SWATing violates the 2nd, 4th, 5th,6th, 8th and 14th amendments.

Half of Colo County Sheriffs, Say They WON’T COMPLY With Unconstitutional Gun Grab

What that means is the bill violates the Fourth Amendment requirement that police obtain a warrant from a judge citing the person to be searched and the specific items sought, upon the judge’s determination of probable cause, before they can enter a home, or a business, or do a body search of a person, or search his or her phone or car. It means the Fifth Amendment prohibition against the taking of property without just compensation, and the taking of liberty without due process (a trial). If it passes, it means that the Sixth Amendment assurance that a person is entitled to a speedy trial and to confront the witnesses accusing him or her will be infringed. It means that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment will be infringed, since the punishment comes without any kind of trial. And it means, as Reams notes, that the state would be abridging the “privileges and immunities” clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

With dishonourable mentions for the 1st, 9th and 10th. Presumably, if the nation’s Socialist-Left managed to have this practice violate the 3rd amendment, this could have been a clean sweep for them.

The final word

We take this from the article penned by Mr. Goldsmith:

In America, if you have not been found guilty of committing a crime, you are not supposed to be punished by the state. If this government protection racket finds through its wonderful jurisprudential system that you have criminally threatened someone, then there is a Common Law basis for interference and apprehension, and, should a suspect be tried and found guilty by a jury of his or her peers, Common Law would lead one to conclude that, under a that paradigm, the person could be jailed.

All so-called “red flag” laws violate this core principle of life under the polis. They place all subjects in the unenviable position of being guilty before proven innocent and irrevocably change the relationship we have with our rights.

Some people, get it.

It appears that the majority of Colorado state politicians don’t.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Advertisement
1 Comment

Culture and Religion

The far-left hates liberty. Isn’t it time to stop praising them as being liberal? Part II

Published

on

By

The far-left hates liberty Isnt it time to stop praising them as being liberal Part II

If we want to defeat socialism and Conserve Liberty, we have to stop using the reality defying language of the Left.

Bernie Sanders recently gave a speech inverting reality to redefine socialism. It was replete with some modernized versions of the tired old tropes of the Communist Manifesto. But the key part included some absurd assertions on Liberty that would have made a younger version of George Orwell proud.

Apparently no one can be ‘free’ unless they have a claim on the time, labor and property of others in society. In the Orwellian mindset of Bernie Sanders and others of the national socialist Left, Liberty means that you should be ‘free’.. to enslave others. No word on whether the people forced to provide their time, labor and property to Bernie voters that are ‘free’.

It is a fact that every living being from bacteria to Brontosauri has had to exert effort in order to survive. However, the Leftist mindset sees an opportunity to control every aspect of everyone’s life in trying to alter this essential fact of life. For if they can assert that every individual has a collective obligation to society at large, they get to enforce that obligation, since they consider themselves to the moral superiors of everyone else. They know this because they are the moral superiors of everyone else.

In this inversion of Liberty from the Left, freedom means that you should be provided with free healthcare, free housing, free college, free food, free childcare and just about any free benefit they can conjure up. Never mind that there isn’t enough money to provide all of these ‘freedoms’ or that the people forced to provide them could hardly be considered to be ‘free’. We’re also to forget about the fact that these ancient ideas run contrary to human nature and that they have never worked in the 400 years that this ‘social’ experiment has been run.

Part I of this series proved that the Far-Left has become the enemy of Liberty while they use labels that falsely imply the polar opposite. Even though Leftists have become increasingly hostile to freedom and basic reality, they still falsely claim to be ‘Liberal’. Part II will present the case for a two-step approach in rhetorically cutting them off at the kneecaps in depriving them of this deception.

The Orwellian language of the enemies of Liberty on the Left.

Ideas are conveyed and considered through the shorthand of language. A positive word connotes a positive thought or feeling on a particular issue, while a negative word has the opposite effect. If Leftists are good at anything, it’s in word selection and exploitation. It’s the reason they put so much effort in trying to control free speech and dictating the terms of debate.

This is why it is imperative that we of the Pro-Liberty Right avoid being trapped into using the language of the Socialist-Left, debating the issues on their terms. This unnecessarily places us in an immediate disadvantage when it’s just a question of choosing the proper words and having the discipline to use them properly.

Eleutheros to Libertas.

There is a reason the Left loves to exploit the derivatives certain ancient words. The first has its origins in Greek: free (liberated), unbound (unshackled); (figuratively) free to realize one’s destiny in Christ.

The second is a derivative of the first, howbeit the etymology is somewhat murky. The second is the Roman personification of Liberty and freedom. The ancient term Libertas has a number of positive and similar sounding derivatives with the two-syllable ‘liber’ common to the words Liberation, Liberty and Liberal.

Each of these three derivatives convey the positive idea of being unbound and free from restraint. When used by the Far-Left this runs contrary to their true meaning because their socialist ideology has the opposite effect, the assertions of Bernie ‘we must be free to enslave others’ Sanders notwithstanding.

Leftists love thinking of themselves a ‘Liberators’ or the vaunted protectors of Liberty, but it is their incessant use of the term Liberal that needs to be corrected. Far too many people wrongly associate socialistic slavery with this contrary term. While many falsely apply some sort of post-modernism ideas to the term, it cannot be denied that Liberal connotes the same positive ideas of freedom as the words Liberty and Liberator. Many associate the real enslavement of society with being Liberal and by extension Liberty and Liberation to the point that the media contradictorily uses the term to refer to socialism.

Defeating the Socialist-Left by depriving them of their false labeling.

Defeating the Leftists on this subject is just a two-step process of taking back the word and having the discipline to use Leftist instead of Liberal. Then it’s just a question of rhetorically pounding Leftists as being hypocrites in trying to sell socialistic slavery as ‘Liberation’ or ‘Liberty’.

We have already made the point that true Liberals belong on the right side of the political spectrum here, here, and here. The fact is, the Conservative-Right side is represented in the Liberal party in Australia. Consider the through the looking-glass mindset of the Left characterizing a win of the Australian Liberal party entitled as ‘How Liberalism Loses’ taking note that they scrupulously avoid using the actual name of the Liberal party in Australia.

Why it is extremely important to use the term Leftist instead of Liberal.

It should be an easy fix to the situation, given that both words start with the same letter and have the same length. It’s just a matter of understanding the vast difference in the meaning of the two words and why we all need to have the discipline to just use Leftist in referring to those people.

Those using the term Liberal when referring to the Left are complicit in perpetrating their deception on who they are. Leftists don’t consider Liberal to be a pejorative. They smile when we use the odd phrases such as ‘Owning the Libs’ because that reinforces their supposed ‘Liberal’ street cred. The same holds true for any variation of terms that have a ‘Lib’ portion.

The Word Salad approach to labeling the Left.

While many understood the logic in this effort, there are still some on the Conservative-Right that still use a ‘Word Salad’ approach when referring to the Left. They will begin using Leftist and switch to Liberal at some point, followed by the term Progressive in another instance, then perhaps switching back to Leftist in another.

No one is really impressed by the undisciplined use of these terms, there really is no point in continuing the practice. One word is sufficient, the Far-Left has no qualms about using the term ‘Far-right’ in referring to the Pro-Liberty side of the aisle. This refers back to one of the Left’s biggest lies: that the Nazis weren’t socialists. But that doesn’t stop them from trying to reinforce that lie at every opportunity where up is down and Left is Right – meaning a socialist workers’ party of the Left is somehow of the ‘Far-Right’.

It is time to fight back on this front instead of conceding the language of the Left, it is how they lie about who they are and what we are. It is how they deceive people who are unaware of their true nature.

The Takeaway.

The Socialist-Left revels in being ‘Liberators’, the defenders of Liberty and of course as being Liberal.
Those positive sounding attributes belong to the Conservative-Right, that why it is important to use the correct word.

Using Leftist instead of Liberal takes away one of the Left’s biggest deceptions, why wouldn’t anyone follow that advice?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

There are still 10 Commandments even if most Christians only believe in 9

Published

on

There are still 10 Commandments even if most Christians only believe in 9

If you ask an average evangelical Christian if they believe in the 10 Commandments, most say yes. In fact, a majority of Americans believe nine of the ten Commandments are still important today. Only one commandment in a poll last year was accepted by less than half of Americans. Only 49% believe keeping the sabbath day holy still applies.

But the Bible is very explicit about the Commandments. From Genesis to Exodus, the sabbath is mentioned as being kept, including by post-resurrection Christian leaders like Peter and Paul. Nothing in the Bible indicates it has changed. In fact, it was the actions of men attempting to claim the Christian faith as their own and merging it with the pagan religions of their day that prompted a change to Sunday as the day of worship. It wasn’t by decree from a prophet of God. It was men trying to make things easier to rule their people who decided to change times and laws.

The Bible is unambiguous. In Exodus 20:

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Now is not the time to debate misinterpretations of Paul’s teachings, the ones most often pointed to when pastors and Christian scholars try to justify their acceptance of the anti-Biblical change in both scope and details surrounding the permanent law of God laid forth for all men and for all time in the 10 Commandments. I’ll leave a video below from 119 Ministries that goes into the details and offers a scriptural basis for keeping the sabbath. I do not believe in all of their conclusions, but it’s a great reference nonetheless.

For now, I’d prefer to appeal to logic. Before Jesus Christ died, after His resurrection, and any time He has appeared in the Bible, neither He nor anyone else talks about moving the sabbath. I’ve heard Bible scholars infer that it was changed to somehow represent His rising and the changes that happened in the world as a result, but that does not explain why the sabbath was kept by Christians throughout the early days of the church even after His death. Historians and the Bible all agree that those who were closest to Jesus continued to keep the sabbath.

It takes a tremendous amount of eisegesis to work that change into the Bible somehow. Moreover, it completely ignores historical records that show why the leaders in the 3rd century changed the day of worship to match with the pagan day of worship, Sunday, and to separate themselves from any attachment to the non-believing Hebrews.

The Bible tells us to keep the sabbath. At no point does it tell us to stop keeping the sabbath. Instead of listening to the traditions of men who were appeasing pagans, why don’t more Christians trust the Word of God?

Here’s the video:

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Why the Project Veritas censorship story is bigger than you probably realize

Published

on

Why the Project Veritas censorship story is bigger than you probably realize

Another day, another conservative news outlet censored, silenced, or purged. That seems to be the attitude coming from many in the media because, well, it’s just so darn commonplace now the public in general is no longer surprised. It’s expected. It’s becoming normalized.

But Project Veritas crossed a line by going after the blatantly corrupt actions of Pinterest in censoring Live Action as “porn.” The line they crossed was to expose a reality that’s not only true at Pinterest, but likely others in the progressive big tech news filtering business. Project Veritas walked in and presented Google, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, and other big tech companies with a mirror, forcing them to look at themselves and the biased methodology they employ when deciding what news is acceptable and what news is too dangerous for the poor, stupid masses to consume.

If you don’t think these companies believe you’re too stupid to think for yourself, just search for certain topics on any of these platforms. You and I are too stupid to think for yourself on topics like global warming, vaccines, or the 9/11 attacks, so you’re presented with the big-tech-approved “facts” so you won’t be misled. Again, they do this because they believe you and I are stupid.

This most recent installment of information suppression against Project Veritas is pitiful because it represents the quashing of ideas that run contrary to their narrative. They are pro-abortion, 100%, which is why Live Action had to be labeled as “porn.” They couldn’t find anything else in their terms of service to slap on Live Action’s content, so someone made the determination that they could get away with labeling it as porn. That, in itself, is a testament to the depravity rampant in these organizations. It takes a very sick mind to believe depictions of abortion can somehow arouse people. Perhaps some at Pinterest have different perspectives on what arouses them.

It’s imperative that every patriotic American is made aware of what was done to Project Veritas, Live Action, and anyone who wants the truth to be known. This is quickly becoming a post-truth society in which someone’s feelings supersede objective realities. This is beyond post-modernism. This is about autonomy, a world in which whatever a person feels is their personal objective truth regardless of what science, religion, culture, or common sense tells them.

In a post-truth society, reality can no longer be a defense against the follies of the collective.

Investigative reporting is only as powerful as the platform that broadcasts it. What the tech giants have done is limit the platforms they control to suppress the truth. Every American should stand opposed to this outrage.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending