Professional Soldiers ® - Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)

- The Soapbox (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=93)

- - Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40772)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 546377)

From what they are saying about the corruption of this guy, from being willing to take bribes to telling investigators posing as gangsters that he "doesn't care" who gets the weapons, IMO he probably isn't really either anti-gun or pro-gun, he probably is literally the type of politician who will say and do whatever is needed to get elected. If he was in a pro-gun district, he'd probably be super pro-gun. But since he's in an anti-gun district, he's super anti-gun. The most common form of politician.

Fixed it for you! ;)

LOL, CA politician, Senator Leland Yee appears to share many of the spinal characteristics of Naegleria fowleri...he also inflicts a similar outcome on much of his loyal constituency.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyz (Post 546410)

LOL, CA politician, Senator Leland Yee appears to share many of the spinal characteristics of Naegleria fowleri...he also inflicts a similar outcome on much of his loyal constituency.

Talk about a hypocrite! He sure pissed a lot of people off in this state but now, like me, they're probably all rejoicing.

He isn't out yet. He was probably framed for being a minority.

Interesting take on creating a climate of fear

This article from Freedom Outpost made a very valid point about schools (and their so-called "experts") creating a climate of fear, so that in the minds of the young, guns are to be viewed not as the inanimate objects that they are, but as a source of fear.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/pu...stage-tyranny/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stobey (Post 547043)

From the article Yesterday in Baltimore, some students saw a person carrying a tripod through the school. Frightened, they reported this to administrators, which resulted in an immediate lockdown:

I would like to know if they stated they saw a person with a tripod and if that is indeed what they reported how does that equate to an immediate lockdown?

to cbtengr: Not sure if your question is to me or not. I'm sure you read the article, which reads:

Yesterday in Baltimore, some students saw a person carrying a tripod through the school. Frightened, they reported this to administrators, which resulted in an immediate lockdown:

This morning, KIPP Ujima Village Academy and KIPP Harmony were placed in heightened security status, based on a report of a possible intruder. Police responded and secured the building, while police and school staff together ensured the safety of all children and staff. After a thorough investigation, police determined that there was no intruder in the building or on school grounds.

“As a precaution while the large school building was searched, students were taken by bus to the shared campus of Baltimore Polytechnic Institute and Western High School. Parents were contacted by phone and through local and social media channels, and were directed to pick up children from that location. (source)
As it turned out, the person carrying the tripod was a journalism student and the tripod was for his camera. However, a SWAT team descended on the school and children and parents alike were terrified after a 4 hour lockdown scenario.

Critical thought is not encouraged. Panic is praised.

Security ‘expert’ Rob Weinhold sums it up:
“It’s just not a time to use any judgment. Take the guesswork out. Lock down the school system. Make sure everyone is safe.”

It would seem that after Sandy Hook, these are the playbook rules to follow.

I did read the article, I just do not follow the logic of the lockdown regarding what someone saw that caused it. Does not take much to cause a panic does it?

The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is fear - fear of the unknown, the complex, the inexplicable. What he wants above everything else is safety.

Henry Louis Mencken

Trumped fears and baseless promises of security. And that's why "inferior men" are as sheep led to slaughter. Complacent to the very doors of the abattoir, rising in panic only when the stench of blood and offal overwhelm their ability to further delude themselves. And their panic avails nothing, serving only to taint the meat - but not so much as to render it unfit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbtengr (Post 547048)

I did read the article, I just do not follow the logic of the lockdown regarding what someone saw that caused it. Does not take much to cause a panic does it?

A local elementary school was evacuated a couple weeks back in an area more 'country' than most California areas. Several kids reported seeing a man with a rifle on campus. Seems everyone is on heightened alert nowadays, even in gun friendly areas. Hard to tell what the reaction would have been before Sandy Hook; there was a range nearby years ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peregrino (Post 547087)

Very well said - teaching the little ones to swim and tell them everyone gets scared but that in order to figure out what you need to do you have to relax and 'think'.

The quote and these posts also illustrate that there ain't much thinkin' goin' on - just a lot of panic..which 'helps' no one except maybe the evil (as noted above)

Florida is a mixed bag. On one hand you have George Z and the douche that shot the guy at the theater for no reason, then you have the beauty queen that used her pink gun to shoot a home invader. You also have this family. "The family that shoots together..."

-------------------------------
Man Who Broke Into Florida Family’s Home Really Had No Idea What Was Waiting for Him, Apr. 7, 2014 6:42pm, Jason Howerton

An armed Florida family banded together and fought back against a man who police say broke into their home early Monday morning. After the intruder ignored a warning shot, at least two of the family members shot the suspect, killing him.

A mother, father and son living in the Winter Haven, Fla., home reportedly woke up just before 7 a.m. to the sound of an unknown person trying to break in through a porch door. Police later identified the suspect as 40-year-old Mitchell Large.

One of the family members first tried to scare away the intruder with a warning shot. Large apparently did not heed the warning, a decision that would cost him his life.

The intruder managed to make his way into the kitchen — but by that point, three members of the Pena family were armed and ready to defend themselves and their home.

Police Chief Gary Hester said “at least two family members fired in defense of themselves and their property.” Though police say Large likely wasn’t armed, Hester said it appears the family was still within their rights to shoot the man.

“It’s not a very far reach to assume that if someone’s forcing their way into your residence early in the morning, they’re not there to wish you well,” the police chief said. “That’s your castle that a reported intruder is coming into, so whether he was armed or not armed, when he failed to retreat, they certainly had a right — if it turns out this way — would have a right to defend themselves.”

The Pena family told police they did not know Large.

-------------------------------
On a side note, The Florida Senate passes the "Warning Shot Law" (obviously a name to denigrate the law by the media)

House Bill 89 by Representative Neil Combee and Senator Greg Evers is on its way to the Governor.

Yesterday, April 3, 2014, HB-89 passed the Florida Senate by a vote of 32-7

In the Senate, 6 Democrats and 1 Republican voted against the bill.

Republicans voting against the bill were: John Legg (R-Lutz)

Democrats voting against the bill were: Oscar Braynon (D-Miami Gardens), Dwight Bullard (D-Cutler Bay), Arthenia Joyner (D)-Tampa), Gwen Margolis (D_Miami), Jeremy Ring (D-Margate), Chris Smith (D-Ft. Lauderdale)

Having previously passed the Florida House by a vote of 93-24, the bill is now making its way to the Governor's desk.

HB-89 is a bill to stop abusive prosecutors from using 10-20-LIFE to prosecute people who, in self-defense, threaten to use deadly force against an attacker as a means to stop an attack.

Some anti-gun, anti-self-defense prosecutors have been abusing the 10-20-LIFE law to prosecute average citizens who displayed a weapon or gun in self-defense to make an attacker back off.

Average citizens who never would have been in the system if they had not been attacked and in fear for their own safety, are being persecuted and prosecuted for defending themselves.

Because citizens took responsibility for their own safety, some prosecutors treat them like criminals and make them victims of a judicial system.

10-20-Life was passed to stop prosecutors and judges from slapping gun-wielding criminals on the wrist so they could quickly clear cases.

The 10-20-Life law was never intended to be used against citizens who, in an act of self-defense, threatened the use of force to stop an attacker, including the unwise use of a warning shot. Yet, that's what some prosecutors are doing. They are willfully and knowingly violating the intent of the law.

Sig Sauer Vs, ATF

Sig filing suit for relief on use of muzzle break.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/217525302/...-ATF-Complaint

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcfixer (Post 547559)

Sig filing suit for relief on use of muzzle break.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/217525302/...-ATF-Complaint

Too bad a suit and press coverage are the only things that seem to work these days.

82 Anti-gun House Democrats ask Obama to expand import ban

Quote:

82 Anti-gun House Democrats ask Obama to expand import ban
Posted By NRA ILA On 10:35 AM 04/12/2014 In | No Comments

On Wednesday, 82 members of the United States House of Representatives sent President Barack Obama a letter asking him to have the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) expand its ban on the importation of semi-automatic firearms and parts for such firearms (see related story).

As reported by the Washington Times on Thursday, “The letter asks that the administration ban the import of high-capacity weapons (sic), as well the frame or receiver of military-style weapons and the practice of importing the guns in parts and then assembling them in the country, among other items.”

While obviously a desperate attempt to cast attention away from the administration’s many problems, the request for an expanded firearm importation ban should not be taken lightly. Severe, politically-driven firearm importation restrictions have been imposed several times over the last 25 years without the consent of Congress, and President Obama has said that he intends to impose gun control with or without Congress’ consent during the remainder of his time in office.

In this instance, Obama’s authority to restrict firearm importation rests in Title 18, Section 925(d)(3) of the U.S. Code, a provision enacted by the Gun Control Act of 1968. Amended by the NRA-supported Firearms Owners’ Protection Act of 1986 to require, rather than merely allow, the administration to approve the importation of firearms, that provision states that “the Attorney General shall authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof if the firearm or ammunition . . . is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes . . . .”

For the record, the NRA doesn’t believe that the importation of firearms should be limited to those that have a relation to sports. The right to arms has always been about having arms for defensive purposes, and in 2008, in District of Columbia, v. Heller, the Supreme Court agreed. The Heller opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, said “the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right,” which includes “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”

However, the BATFE doesn’t even interpret the law’s so-called “sporting purposes” test correctly. On several occasions over the last 25 years, it has deliberately changed its reading of the law, for political reasons, to prohibit the importation of semi-automatic firearms gun control supporters wanted banned.

In 1989, the BATFE (then BATF) concocted the theory that “sporting purposes” did not include practical-skills-based rifle competitions, which are dominated by semi-automatic, detachable-magazine rifles. It admitted that the National Rifle Trophy Matches and NRA National Rifle Championships are sporting, but ignored the fact that semi-automatic, detachable-magazine rifles dominate those events too. Further, it entirely ignored the law’s provision for firearms that are “readily adaptable” to a sporting purpose. It then banned the importation of 43 makes and models of semi-automatic rifles that it had previously approved for importation, including the exceptional Galil, HK-91/93/94 series, Fabrique Nationale FN and FNC, Steyr A.U.G, Valmet and, of course, the Kalashnikov series.

For years, the BATFE used Handgun Factoring Criteria which allow for the importation of handguns that get enough points on the basis of their size, caliber, safety features, sights and other physical attributes. In 1993, however, the agency ignored its own criteria and banned the importation of “assault pistols” that met the criteria, and that BATFE had previously approved.

In 1998, the BATFE expanded its 1989 ban by prohibiting any semi-automatic rifle that could accept a detachable magazine of over 10 rounds capacity, on the grounds that Sen. Feinstein’s “assault weapon” ban included a provision prohibiting the importation of newly-made such magazines. The BATFE simply ignored the fact that magazine capacity had nothing to do with whether firearms themselves were defined as “assault weapons” in Feinstein’s law.

Get 82 anti-gun members of Congress to sign onto something and you can bet there will be at least one lie or preposterous exaggeration, and this letter is no exception to that rule. The letter asks for a ban on the importation of AK-47-style pistols, claiming that they are the “top weapons of choice for international gun smugglers.” Yet it contradictorily identifies them as a “new breed of pistol” that has been “newly developed.” Maybe that’s what the letter’s authors, Rep, John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) had in mind when they referred to their letter as “a no-brainer.”

The letter focuses on Kalashnikov-style firearms because they are so obviously a type of firearm that the Second Amendment protects under the guidelines established by the Supreme Court in the Heller case. In Heller, the Court said that the amendment protects the right to have firearms that are useful for defensive purposes and that are “in common use.” Millions of Kalashnikov-series rifles have been bought in America during the last quarter-century, making them among the most common of our time, and they are obviously among the rifles that are most useful for defensive purposes.

This latest request, however out of step with the prevailing sense of Congress, demonstrates a firearm importation law in severe need of revision, particularly when considered in the light of BATFE’s illegitimate, agenda-driven misinterpretations of that law in the past.

Article printed from The Daily Caller: http://dailycaller.com

URL to article: http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/12/82...nd-import-ban/