Connect with us

Guns and Crime

What would happen if we applied ‘red flag’ laws to other Constitutional rights?

Published

on

What would happen if we applied red flag laws to other Constitutional rights

Leftists would love SWATing gun owners. How would they react to these being applied to their basic human rights?

Several months ago, Colion Noir had the media’s collective knickers in a twist over a video asking whether we should apply the same standards to other constitutional liberties as we apply to the Second Amendment. For some, certain civil rights are sacrosanct, while others can be tossed away without a second thought. The fact is they are all vitally important to the conservation of liberty.

A column on the same subject admonished the national socialist media for perpetuating Media Contagion forwarding the idea that they need to stop selectively glorifying these killers. He followed it up with this:

You can still report on the shootings … we just need reasonable laws that place limitations on the glory and fame you give to these killers and their twisted motivations…

You know that feeling of anxiety that shot through your body when I said the government should pass laws to limit the media’s ability to exercise their First Amendment right.

That’s the same feeling gun owners get when they hear people say the same thing about the Second Amendment. Hearing me advocate for the government’s ability to limit anyone’s First Amendment rights, including the media, should anger all of you watching this video, the same way it should anger you when anyone tries to use the same limitations on the Second Amendment.

Making the point that everyone should have the same exact reaction whenever someone talks about ‘common sense’ limitations on liberty, whether it’s about the 2nd amendment or any other parts of the bill of rights.

He finished the video with this statement:

I honestly believe ignoring shooters and not giving them any attention will do more to stop school shootings than any gun control measure ever will.

However, I vehemently disagree with the government infringing on the media’s First Amendment rights the same way I don’t believe the government should infringe on anyone’s Second Amendment rights.

The solution to the problem we all want to solve will only come with a firm commitment to all of our rights—not just the ones you think are important.

[Emphasis added]

The national socialist media lost their collective minds since they neglected to watch that in it’s entirety, as detailed in the follow up video:

The point in all of this is that if they became incensed at the destruction of one civil liberty, why don’t they have the same reaction to the destruction of all the others?

What do you consider to be the least important liberty?

Consider the following thought experiment, how would the national socialist media react to blatant prior restraint controls over their content with a 1st Amendment version of ‘red flag’ gun confiscation SWATing? Granted, we’re in the business ourselves, so we would vehemently oppose such a draconian measure.

Would the other parts of the nation’s press have the same lack of concern for such a step as they have with so-called ‘red flag’ laws for the 2nd amendment? The national socialist media is clearly pushing for these draconian laws while they layer on a syrupy coating of Orwellian doublespeak.

These laws clearly entail the taking of one’s means of self-defense with a pre-dawn no-knock raid from a SWAT team. If the members of one’s household survive this assault, the owner of said private property can look forward to months of court appearances and legal costs to prove themselves innocent after essentially being deemed guilty. Never mind the irreparable damage to one’s reputation as being the subject of such a raid in the middle of the night.

But for the denizens’ of the nation’s socialist media this is merely a move to ‘temporarily’ remove the firearms of someone in crisis or similarly sugar coated language. This being exemplified by the description of these in an AP article pushing for ‘a strong red flag law that would allow courts to issue life-saving extreme risk protection orders.’ The bias against the inalienable human right of self-defense is palpable here, but would they approach an equivalent measure that impacts their civil liberties with the same lack of concern?

Thought experiment: Applying ‘red flag’ laws to other constitutional liberties.

How would the national socialist media write a story in which the debate was over ‘temporarily’ taking away their rights? Would they consider it ‘progress’ to have anyone issue an anonymous charge and shut down their operations for a year or more?

How would the bird-cage liner of record react to a SWAT team swarming the offices of the New York Times, USA Today, Denver Post or Chicago Tribune to shut them down over a spurious complaint that they were a ‘danger?

The New York Times enthusiastically celebrated a mass murderer Mao Zedong as “one of history’s great revolutionary figures.”  It should also be noted the attitude of mass murderer Mao towards firearms: “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Nothing gums up the works of a system to mass murder millions like a few thousand peasants with ‘weapons of war’. However, in their wondrous Utopia, government is always a benevolent father, never the source of oppression. The true danger arises from inanimate objects such as AK-47’s and airplanes that ‘take aim’ at people without human intervention.

What if someone decided such talk was subversive and anonymously filed for a ‘red flag’ to have the courts issue a ‘life-saving extreme risk protection order’ to shut them down for several months or years? Whereby they would have to prove they weren’t a danger?

The bottom line: This is just a thought experiment, we are not advocating this step.

Keep in mind this is just a thought experiment, we are not advocating these actions, nor are we trying to give the authoritarians any more ideas than they already have. The point is that all of the civil liberties in the bill of rights are equally important and that shifting these ideas over to a different right should give pause to those advocating these draconian actions.

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

0

Guns and Crime

California’s new red flag gun law is so radical, the ACLU opposes it

Published

on

Californias new red flag gun law is so radical the ACLU opposes it

If you want to see the direction the national Democratic Party will go, just watch California. As the radical progressives of California go, so too will other progressive states follow. That should be terrifying to gun owners in any blue states as Governor Gavin Newsom signed a red flag gun law on Friday that is so over-the-top, even the leftists at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have come out against it.

This is just another reason efforts to force a recall election have been very successful so far.

The new law expands the previous red flag gun law by allowing teachers, co-workers, and employers to petition the court to remove someone’s firearms without due process. Previously, only law enforcement officers and immediate family members had the power to petition the court.

The ACLU called into question the constitutionality of the law, saying it’s attack on civil liberties by taking away someone’s property for up to five years without giving them a chance to defend themselves from the alleged future crimes they may have committed. They also noted the expansion puts too much power into the hands of people who may “lack the relationship or skills required to make an appropriate assessment.”

With red flag gun laws, a court order is issued after interested parties petition a judge with claims the gun owner may pose a threat to themselves or others. They’re very similar to current laws that allow for involuntary commitment, except the accused under red flag gun laws are not allowed to defend themselves before their property is confiscated.

California’s version will be the most obtuse in the nation once it takes effect January 1, 2020.

2nd Amendment rights groups are finding the ACLU as an unexpected partner if fighting this law. Most of the rights groups are right-leaning while the ACLU is notoriously progressive. But even they cannot abide by this law without a fight.

The expansion of the red flag gun laws in California were just one of a dozen gun control laws signed by Governor Newsom. It’s time for California voters to find their nearest recall petition location so we can get Newsom out ASAP.

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

Guns and Crime

Shannon Grove’s statement on Taft Correctional Institution

Published

on

Shannon Groves statement on Taft Correctional Institution

SACRAMENTO – California Senate Republican Leader Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) released the following statement upon learning that House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA 23rd District) will meet with the Attorney General and the U.S. Department of Justice next week to discuss suspending activities relating to the closure of Taft Correctional Institution (TCI). Along with Congressman McCarthy, Senator Grove recently sent a letter to the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) urging federal officials to reconsider the shutdown.

Taft correctional facility may not be closing in January

https://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/taft-correctional-facility-may-not-be-closing-in-januaryCongressman Kevin McCarthy released the following statement on the Taft Correctional Institution:

“I appreciate the Attorney General and the U.S. Department of Justice’s decision to temporarily suspend activities related to the Bureau of Prisons’ rash decision to deactivate the Taft Correctional Institution. I am looking forward to meeting with the Attorney General next week to discuss why this deactivation action was taken in the first place.”

The facility is run by the Management & Training Corporation said they were shocked when the closure was previously announced.

TCI employs more than 340 individuals and provides $4.66 million in economic support to the local economy. The pending closure date will take place on January 30, 2020.

“I am thrilled to hear the joint effort led by Congressman McCarthy and our incredible community has helped to suspend the impending closure of the Taft Correctional Institution. This suspension reaffirms the serious ramifications that the closure would have on our local community.

“I look forward to receiving an explanation on the detrimental decision to shut down Taft Correctional Institution which would severely affect the livelihoods of employees and their families,” said Senate Republican Leader Shannon Grove.

Senator Grove’s letter.

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

Democrats

The next demand after ‘universal’ background checks: Governmental permission to defend yourself

Published

on

By

Universal Background Checks Video

As predicted, the left is now moving on to new demands for licensing for unalienable human rights.

FreedomToons debunks the next stage in the authoritarian socialist left’s obsession with gun confiscation, the requirement for governmental permission to possess an unalienable human right. The left is never satisfied with just one incremental imposition on our freedom. They see their campaign to destroy liberty as a multi-step process.

‘Universal’ background checks place the government in control of private property, something the founding fathers would find to be abhorrent. Having to obtain governmental permission to buy, sell or transfer private property means the government is asserting control over that property, to record who has that property, tax it when they see fit or even deny said transfers. This is why the national socialist left obsesses over this step towards gun confiscation.

Registration/licensing is the next step on this journey, formally placing the government in control of an unalienable human right.

‘Universal’ background checks change the essential relationship of government having the consent of the people, to that of the people needing to obtain the consent of the government in exercising their unalienable human rights. Make no mistake, these kinds of tyrannical moves only begin with the right of self-preservation. Soon enough, they morph into requirements for other freedoms.

Registration is confiscation.

Placing the government in control of an unalienable human right means that permission can be withdrawn at any moment. We have already proven that registration/licensing is confiscation with the only distinction being were the guns are stored until they are destroyed.

Licensing/registration schemes for basic civil rights means that the government can simply revoke it’s permission on a whim and demand that the people surrender their guns as has happened down through history. Our second video will make that point clear.

While they will promise that each new restriction on freedom will miraculously solve the problem, these are but mere steps to their ultimate goal of gun confiscation. As we already predicted, the demand for ‘universal’ background checks will quickly morph into demands for self-defense licensing. A requirement that everyone obtain permission from the government in order to exercise the basic human right of self-preservation. Never mind that setting up the government to be in control of it’s own constraints makes no sense.

Does the left really want to place the government in control of our civil liberties?

We would have riots in the newsrooms of the New York Times if freedom of the press depended upon governmental permission. The precepts of the Bill of Rights are constraints on the government, they don’t exist if they depend upon it’s permission. The right to privacy or due process, won’t exist if the powers that be control their implementation. But somehow the authoritarian socialist left doesn’t seem to have a problem with this issue when applied to guns. It’s that special exception that everyone misses in the founding documents that says that these are unalienable human rights, but only if kids aren’t crying on the tele.

Please note that the 2nd amendment only affirms a pre-existing right:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

[Emphasis added]

Note that says the people, not militia and that this pre-existing right shall not be infringed. This was meant as a bulwark against tyranny, it doesn’t make any sense to have this control against tyranny in the hands of the government.

Sometimes, it’s just too easy to predict the actions of the authoritarian socialist left.

It was only back in August that we predicted that if the Republicans and President Trump knuckled under to the liberty grabber leftists, that they would be back with new demands for licensing/registration requirements on our inalienable human rights.

In the case of the original video from VOX, published in September, they are getting ahead of themselves with new demands even before their old obsessions were fulfilled. Apparently the left is so obsessed with gun confiscation, they couldn’t wait to make this new demand for the restriction of liberty.

The authoritarian left wants to restrict liberty based on what might happen.

One almost has to admire the chutzpah of the authors of the original production in talking about restricting the liberty of people based on future actions. Part of their ‘logic’ being that a long arduous licensing process would catch or deter someone who is ‘in crisis’ [whatever that means] before they might do something ‘bad’.

Again, it’s easy to predict where this will go from here, since it’s just a minor leap in logic to decide to preclude any future actions with the final solution of gun confiscation.

Registration, Confiscation, Annihilation.

Our second video proves the point that licensing/registration is virtually confiscation. It is a first hand account of what happens when people forget that the common sense human right of self-defense is a restraint on the government.

We also had gun control. The government said that children were playing with guns and we had hunting accidents. People accidentally shooting each other and we had criminals again murderers. The only way that they could track the murderer was by the serial number of the gun so bring us your gun to the police station then we can register the serial number and we can track the criminal.

Not long afterwards they said, no it did not help we could not track all the criminals the best way to have no more crimes and no more people getting hurt. Bring your guns to the police station and they already know who had guns because we registered our guns.

[Emphasis added]

The Bottom-line.

Everyone should be able to see why the national socialist left obsesses over ‘universal’ background checks, a critical step to gun confiscation. The ‘big picture’ on all of this should make it clear why the left is double-dealing on demanding gun confiscation while denying they are demanding gun confiscation.

They need to determine gun ownership with ‘universal’ background checks. This is followed by virtual gun confiscation with licensing/registration schemes. From there it’s just a matter of calling in the guns at the appropriate time, most likely after another mass murder tragedy since these requirements never solve the problem of societal violence.

This is why more people are answering NO or we will not comply to the demands of the left in destroying our liberty. The original VOX video proves than ‘universal’ background checks won’t ever be enough. Virtual gun confiscation with licensing/registration won’t be enough for the liberty grabbers. For the national socialist left, gun confiscation will always be the final solution to the liberty problem.

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