The President's Gun Control Plan

President Obama would like to do away with all guns and we believe that he will take the administrative route to that goal. He has shown that his interests are not with the rule of law or allowing Congress to create law. He wants to do what he feels is right and does not want to take the time to have the legislative process work. It is just too messy.

He could not pass the Dream Act so he did it administratively by issuing a Presidential finding. He will do the same with guns.  For those of you who think that he will ban guns, you would be wrong. An outright ban on guns would not stand Supreme Court scrutiny. His way will be more sneaky. He will call the FBI and order them to increase the fee for gun background checks to around $10,000.  Would you buy a gun if you had to pay that type of fee? For most, the answer would be no.

This action will stop all legal gun sales and shut down those dreaded gun shows. It will also kill the gun sale and manufacturing business in the US. The anti-gunners will view this as a success. It will not stop the illegal gun sales but heck, that only effects criminals and everyone knows they NEVER use guns!

With sales and manufacturing eliminated, the next step will be to force all gun owners to give up their guns. Again this will be done administratively. Through the FBI and the state and local gun registration systems, each gun owner will be assessed an fee for maintaining the system and documenting changes in "ownership." It will be sold as a "identification system" to quickly identify who is the actual owner of the gun.  The fee will be something like $500 per gun per year. Who would pay the fee for a gun that cost them $800?

Gun owners will be notified that if they do not pay the fee, local police will be notified and they will come and confiscate the weapon(s).  Those who do not want to pay the fee can simply turn in their weapon to the local police. (Who will sell it to gang bangers!!)

We expect that law abiding Americans will line up to turn in their weapons without a whimper! It would not violate the Constitution as it is a fee and if they pay the fee they can keep their guns.

This is what we can expect in the next couple months from the "dictator."  We hope you are ready to defend your home with a pitchfork, if it is not also taken from you!

Conservative Tom

No Time To Disarm America

December 18, 2012 by Sam Rolley 

UPI

In the wake of the terrible tragedy that occurred last week at a Connecticut elementary school, the opinions have begun following in from both sides of the gun control debate. The debate is sure to become increasingly fallacious and nasty in coming months as people on both sides make ridiculous claims to support their case.

President Barack Obama spoke over the weekend at a memorial service for the 26 victims of Adam Lanza’s horrifying shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School. His speech, some people (gun-control advocates, no doubt) gushed, was akin to Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.

Here is part of the President’s speech:

We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change. We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true. No single law—no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society.

But that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely, we can do better than this. If there is even one step we can take to save another child, or another parent, or another town, from the grief that has visited Tucson, and Aurora, and Oak Creek, and Newtown, and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that—then surely we have an obligation to try.

In the coming weeks, I will use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens—from law enforcement to mental health professionals to parents and educators—in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this. Because what choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine. Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

The President is prepared to “use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens” to prevent further tragedies like what occurred in Connecticut. Because, he asserted, Americans must protect the children.

The President’s words are strong, and combined with his past positions there is little doubt that his plan involves launching anything less than a full on assault on Americans’ right to own semi-automatic weapons.

In a USA Today column last week, Glenn Reynolds channeled famed author and renowned gun activist William S. Burroughs in describing what the government’s most likely course of action will be:

“After a shooting spree,” author William Burroughs once said, “they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it.” Burroughs continued: “I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

Many Americans disagree with Burroughs’ opinion and are pushing for police and military personnel to be society’s sole armed protectors. And in gun-free zones, such as schools and many State and Federal properties, they are.

Those places have also become magnets for crazed gunmen. The cowardly mind-set of a man willing to kill at random — despite the anti-hero persona mainstream media seek to affix to these individuals — doesn’t lend itself well to ballsy attacks on rooms filled with armed men. Instead, they seek out the weakest or most unassuming targets imaginable: moviegoers in a darkened theater, attendees at a political rally, mall shoppers or schoolchildren.

And no matter what utopia the American left believes we inhabit, laws banning (and the all-out confiscation of) even every firearm manufactured will not stop the killing. Those capable of murder believe themselves to be far superior to any laws of man.

Perhaps a better option would involve a lessening of gun laws and an American realization that it is not up to the police, but to the citizen to ensure his own safety.

Speculation is reckless, but it is very tempting to fantasize about how Friday morning may have turned out differently if the school had been full of armed and trained teachers with easy access to firearms.

“Guns in schools, the horror,” liberal Americans might say. They may even venture to believe that frustrated armed teachers could be dangerous to students, though that seems very unlikely given the stories of teacher heroism coming from Connecticut where those educators likely wished they had tools at their disposal to better protect themselves and their students.

In 2008, the isolated Harrold Independent School District in Texas made an addition to its $100,000 state-of-the-art security system because administrators feared an armed intruder could do much damage in the 20 minutes it could take police to arrive. Feeling students and staff would be safer if on-site, trained staff members were equipped to handle a crisis at a moment’s notice, they decided to allow teachers to train and carry firearms to school.

In the years since, no gun has been brandished and no student hurt by an armed teacher. In fact, reports indicate that the students really didn’t have much at all to say about the policy. But the school district’s superintendent David Thweatt made a good point in 2009, a year after the policy went into place.

“We’re the first responders. We have to be,” Thweatt said. “We don’t have 5 minutes. We don’t have 10 minutes. We would have had 20 minutes of hell” if attackers had targeted the school.

Despite the President’s opinions, it is no time for gun rights activists to back off on the fight to keep and bear all legal firearms. We are all our own first responders and the protectors of those in our care who cannot defend themselves.