Confiscation of Guns Next?

All freedom loving Americans should fear what the gun-grabbers are up to.  They, in the face of Senator Diane Feinstein, have proposed to effectively confiscate all "assault" weapons after the death of the owner, regardless of the licensing of the person who might inherit the weapon. If they get this done, it will not be long before all guns are taken by the government. Yes, that is the slippery slope argument, however, in this country today, those who lead us are the most conniving and deceitful politicians we have ever seen in this country.  

This government is NOT your friend. It is your enemy and must be kept at bay via laws and the Constitution. However, when you see the strengthening of the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act which effectively takes away citizen rights, the time has come to wonder when will we get the "knock" on the door.  Heck, if you hold up a sign within view of the President, you can be arrested.  That is not the America in which we grew up.

There is no argument that Adam Lanza was a nut case who stole legal weapons and used them to do an atrocious act. However, to punish all law abiding citizens for the crimes of a insane killer, is also insane.

If the gun-grabbers were serious about stopping violence against children, they would attack the larger causes of death such as medical mistakes, car accidents, and falling off ladders. However, the goal of the gun  haters is more sinister, they want to remove from the hands of everyday Americans, the ability to defend themselves from the government. 

Just as President Obama does not want to have to put up with the Congress to get things passed (i.e. Dream Act), he and his friends will administratively pass gun restrictions which are much more draconian than the ones proposed by the Senator Feinstein.  We should expect that within a month of the failure of the latest rendition of gun control legislation, President Obama will institute his own version and pass it administratively which will include outrageous fees ($10,000 for example) for registration of weapons and annual fees ($500 per weapon  for example) which would prevent most law abiding people from paying.

Additonally, if one did not pay the fees and was found to have a gun it would result in a lifetime prison sentence and millions of dollars of fines.   Who would want to face that prospect? The only option would be to turn in the guns.  It will all be done "legally" and therefore there would be no Constitutionality issues.  "If you pay the fees, you can keep your guns" will be the pablum that will be fed to the masses.

Do not be deceived, this Administration and its friends want to disarm this country so that they will be able to control it the way they want. They want to "change" America.  Be Scared, Be Very Scared!

Conservative Tom

The Gun Grab Cometh

December 31, 2012 by Bob Livingston 

PHOTOS.COM

Whether the gun grabbers orchestrated the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre or just saw it as the perfect opportunity to rip the heart out of yet another Constitutional amendment, before the bodies of those slaughtered babies were even cold the 1 percent were signaling that 2013 is going to be a tumultuous year for gun owners — and liberty.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (Fascist-Calif.) announced on her website on Dec. 17 that she was introducing a bill in January to “stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high capacity ammunition feeding devises.” It will ban 120 specifically named weapons, including handguns and shotguns, and strengthen the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004.

According to the outline of Feinstein’s bill, it will grandfather in all legally owned weapons, but it will require they be registered and the owner fingerprinted. It will require a $200 per weapon tax be paid. The guns will not be transferable, meaning that upon the death of the owner the guns will become the property of the Federal government. It will allow the sale of 900 specifically named weapons, but none that can accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 10 rounds.

She and her fascist cohorts in crime — New York’s Senator Chuck Schumer and Representatives Carolyn McCarty and Jerrold Nadler and West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, among others — are calling for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and any weapon that uses high-capacity magazines. Unfortunately, a vast number of the unwashed masses — in a fit of emotionalism resulting from the thought of all those dead kindergartners — are buying into the lie that one more law would have saved those innocents. The above-mentioned 1 percenters all indicated they would steal everyone’s weapons and magazines, placating themselves with the rationalization that it’s a gun and magazine buy-back program, if they thought they could get away with it.

Never mind that purported shooter Adam Lanza broke a half dozen or more laws before he ever shot the first child. Never mind that Connecticut is ranked fifth of the 50 States in gun control laws, according the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence because the State “has strong gun laws that help combat the illegal gun market, prevent the sale of most guns without background checks and reduce risks to children.” And never mind that, according to FBI homicide data, rifles of all types are the least-used guns when crimes are committed.

Of course, Feinstein, Schumer, et al. care not a whit about children, as I explained here. If they did, they’d be weeping over the hundreds of children killed by President Barack Obama’s drone attacks, those killed in car accidents because of corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards and government-mandated air bags, and the 2,000 aborted every day in America.

Instead, they try to turn reason on its ear by equating law-abiding Americans — who own certain semi-automatic weapons — with terrorists. So their answer is to add more layers of laws, bureaucracy and expense on the already burdensome exercise of acquiring weapons for protection (and yes, it can be burdensome in some States).

But you don’t need those scary-looking so-called “assault weapons” to protect yourself, they’ll say. Or, as President Barack Obama reminds us in typical straw man fashion, military-style weapons with high capacity magazines shouldn’t be in the hands of civilians.

Tell that to these men who were left to their own devices during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

When society broke down, law enforcement was nowhere to be found. These business owners armed themselves to protect their property. But had a large crowd braved the guns they possessed and come to loot their stores, the double-barreled shotgun and bolt-action rifle being wielded would have been inadequate, where an AR15 and several 30-round magazines would have been quite a deterrent. As the reporter said at the end of the clip, more than 100 Korean-owned businesses had already been looted. Just not this one.

The gun grabbers will tell you that you no one needs an AR15 because they’re not used for hunting. That would be a surprise to the tens of thousands of deer and other small game felled by them each year.

But the 2^nd Amendment was not put in place just for hunters or for self-defense. It was put in place to protect Americans from totalitarians in government like Jerrold Nadler, who told CNS News: “One of the definitions of a nation state is that the state has a monopoly on legitimate violence. And the state ought to have a monopoly on legitimate violence. If the premise of your question is that people are going to resist a tyrannical government by shooting machine guns at American troops, that’s insane.”

Yes, it’s insane because Americans are prohibited from owning “machine guns” unless they first acquire a Class 3 Federal firearms license, an expensive and daunting undertaking. The weapons on the list to be banned are semi-automatic — one trigger pull, one round fired — not fully automatic. That meme is yet another straw man.

If the state has a monopoly on violence, that is full-blown tyranny. Americans would no longer be citizens, they would be subjects. Nadler has revealed the end game.

Folks, the Sandy Hook shooting narrative has more holes than a piece of hardware cloth, as do the Aurora, Colo., theater shooting, the Milwaukee Sikh temple shooting and the 1999Columbine, Colo., massacre, for that matter. They’re likely all false flag events. And just like previous ones, they will lead to loss of liberty.

The fallout from these shootings is always the same: a call for stricter gun laws. As Nadler’s comment indicates, this time the gun grabbers are emboldened as never before. But why wouldn’t they be. It was just a year ago that they passed the National Defense Authorization Act, which allows for the indefinite detention, without charges or trial, of Americans on American soil. And they did so with barely a whimper out of the populace, which is becoming ever more docile and subservient by the day.

The psychopaths in the cesspool of Washington, D.C., realize there is no better time to strike than while Americans are emotionally drained from the visions of grieving parents and the sweet smiles of the dead children.

The truth is that of the 12,664 murders committed in the United States in 2011, rifles were used in only 323 of them. “Knives or other cutting instruments” were used in 1,694 murders; hands and feet in 726; and blunt objects like clubs and hammers were used in 496. A ban on knives and hands and feet would be far more effective in reducing murders, which Nadler claims is the goal.

But, of course, reducing murders is not the goal of the 1 percent. It’s total disarmament. That would give the state the long-awaited monopoly on violence.