Posts Tagged ‘gun advocates’

Second Amendment Decided Tomorrow

June 27, 2010

Time is up for the U.S. Supreme Court to issue its decision in the monumental gun-rights case, McDonald v. Chicago. The case basically asks the question, “Do the states have to obey the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms?” As originally written, the Bill of Rights was a limit on federal power only. However, under the 14th Amendment of 1868, the states were gradually brought under the control of the Bill of Rights, one small piece at a time, by Supreme Court decisions.

Chicago (and hence Illinois, along with many other localities around the nation) have basically thumbed their noses at the right to keep and bear, and hence this case to determine whether local governments can do that, or whether they are obligated to respect the rights, due process, privileges and immunities, and equal protection of all Americans. June 28 marks the end of the High Court’s season, and as expected, they’ve waited until the last day for this blockbuster. The decision will come sometime after 7 a.m. Arizona time (10 a.m. in D.C.). Pro-rights advocates are waiting to see the word “Reversed,” meaning the lower court ruling that says you have no rights is overturned, and the states are bound by 2A. Anti-rights advocates hope to see “Affirmed,” meaning Chicago can continue to deny the right to keep and bear arms to anyone in the city, as it sees fit.

A word of caution — “news” outlets will race to report on the decision, which past experience has shown will be highly inaccurate, replete with misunderstandings and bad characterizations, deliberate distortions (like, the world will end thanks to the decision), and blatant spin (we’re doomed, what is the Supreme Court doing to us, what about crime — whichever way the decision goes). They will likely get the headline right (affirmed or reversed) and summarize the unofficial non-binding summary (called the syllabus, published at the head of each case).

But keep in mind it will be impossible to read and comprehend the thick pages of legaleses that are the decision, when a well groomed talking head with little understanding of firearms policy or High Court procedure talks to you within five minutes of the decision coming out. See how they did this in words and pictures http://www.gunlaws.com/SCGC-HellerPhotos4.htm in the previous case, from my detailed account in Heller http://www.gunlaws.com/hc.htm. I will release a detailed evaluation and analysis of McDonald, after conferring with experts nationwide, after enough time to do the legwork. Watch for it.

Obama Takes First Step in Banning All Firearms

December 3, 2009

Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:56pm EDT Reuters News Service

The Full Article Herehttp://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015

On Wednesday the Obama administration took its first major step in a plan to ban all firearms in the United States. The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.

The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms.

The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth? What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

This is not a joke, nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control.

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush’s administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

If This Passes, There Will Be WAR!

Please forward this message to others who may be concerned about the direction in which our country is headed.

Silence will lead us to Socialism.


%d bloggers like this: