Thursday, June 23, 2016

Can We Place Progressive Politicians and Musicians On A Secret List?

Like irrational toddlers, Congress critters stage a sit-in, musicians craft an open letter to Congress, and like clockwork, the radical agenda of the gun grabbing progressives marches forward.

The latest attempt by the extreme left to undermine Liberty is the notion that gun sales should be restricted to those on the no fly list. At first blush, it sounds like a reasonable accommodation, maybe even a "commonsense" solution. But who exactly is on the list, and how do they get there? Is it just foreign radicals, known jihadists from around the globe intent to go Aloha Snackbar in yet another gun-free zone? If only this were true.

As many have discovered, the DHS no fly list seems to struggle at determining who the bad guys are and who aren't. Some people are added and are never able to find out why, much less get their names removed. What happened to due process? What about the presumption of innocence?

The occupiers in Washington claim this approach is necessary to stop gun violence. It has been proven time and again that criminals rarely obey the law when it comes to acquiring their weapons. Even in cities with the strictest gun laws, criminals have little trouble finding the right tools to carry out their attacks. Chicago, with its draconian gun laws, is nothing more than city of future victims, clocking 12 murders and 54 shootings over Father's Day weekend alone. They are on pace for almost 600 murders and over 3,000 shooting victims in 2016. Does anyone seriously think adding a Chicago gang member to a list that keeps him from buying a gun will stop the war being waged on Chicago's streets? Its idiocy of the highest order. At the very least, arm the citizens so they have a fighting chance.

Even if it were possible to seize every weapon in a country, terrorism will still flourish. If not with illegally obtained guns, instead it would be with knives, pressure cookers, cars or even box cutters and pepper spray. If the enemy is motivated by a religion that glorifies murder, promising a heavenly whorehouse as a reward, no list will ever stop the attacks. And if our very own government refuses to name the source of the problem, how could they possibly identify those who might belong on such a list?

Instead, our very own Department of Homeland Security is too busy preparing to fight people who, reject "federal authority in favor of state or local authority." Those 10th Amendment supporting folks are a scary bunch. Don't forget those, "individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration." If only I had a nickle for every pro life protester who has gone on a shooting rampage. The DHS report identifies anyone who opposes Obama as potential extremists, and even insults veterans by calling them potential terrorists.

Everything sounds like "commonsense" until it passes - the devil is always in the details. One man's terrorist "no fly list" soon becomes the next administration's political enemy hit list. This current administration authorized the outright persecution by the IRS of TEA Party and Conservative groups - often no more than mothers and wives from small town America trying to make a difference.

If this is what the government does to law abiding citizens in rural Alabama, what will they do to those who are more outspoken? Will they find themselves denied their 2nd Amendment Right because some other unelected bureaucrat like Lois Lerner seeks to punish those who believe differently than the party in power?

elephant in the room
There have been numerous examples of government bureaucrats and their media shills labeling 2nd Amendment supporters, Christians, veterans, and people who support freedom in any form, as possible terrorists, while doing their best to ignore and excuse the proverbial elephant in the room. The SPLC includes Christian ministries, pro Israel groups, and Conservative groups on its absurd "hate watch" list. Since government is dominated by the radical left, who seem disinterested in actual terrorist threats, who would you trust to manage such a list?

If both the NRA and the progressive ACLU share concerns over the whole notion, it just might be a bad idea.

When the organization that is supposedly tasked with preventing terrorism continues to chase mythical enemies, while ignoring the ones already active worldwide, you know America is in trouble.

Member Acevedo (Austin, TX Police Chief) reminded the Council that the threat from right wing extremists domestically is just as real as the threat from Islamic extremism. (DHS) Secretary Johnson agreed and noted that CVE, by definition, is not solely focused on one religion. Member Goldenberg seconded Member Acevedo’s remarks and noted the importance of online sites in right wing extremist
communities, not only in America but worldwide.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Homeland Security Advisory Council

Open Session
The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars 
January 21, 2016  

I would love for someone to point out even 5 terrorist attacks by "right-wing" extremists in the last 20 years. Because if they are truly a threat, they sure are keeping a very low profile. There is one group that continues to rack up a massive body count, and it certainly is not Christians or Conservatives. And just to be fair, once we exclude a certain religion of peace, why is it that nearly every violent nutcase is a public school educated lefty? If DHS was serious about our safety, they would simply put all progressives on their magical list.

Here are some "commonsense" solutions. Enforce the laws already on the books. If you are elected to office in the Federal government, don't arm criminals or support global terrorism. Keep violent criminals behind bars. Enforce immigration laws, denying entry to violent illegal aliens, and deporting those already here who fill the prisons to capacity. Screen all immigrants carefully, especially those from countries that have shown an unwillingness to discourage violent beliefs. Prosecute and/or deport all those who engage in preaching violence - this includes especially extremists on the left who are far more prone to violence. And finally, those people who are mentally ill, and a danger to themselves and others, must be addressed. Since many of these hold elected office in DC, it will be tricky to get them institutionalized and the help they so obviously need.

I have a passion for this issue because I love Liberty. And I oppose everyone who attempts to undermine it in anyway, even out of ignorance. The Founders were passionate about gun ownership because they knew the history of tyranny, many having firsthand experience with their natural rights being denied at the whims of the powerful. Don't let people, who for nefarious reasons, want to con you into conceding just a wee bit more of your Liberty for false promises of more security.

If gun ownership, free speech, free exercise of faith, protection from illegal search or seizure are all NATURAL, GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS, then even if you are a minority of ONE, NO vote, NO politician, NO mob, and not even any laughable "commonsense" solutions progressives dream up can deny any citizen those rights. Relinquish even one inch of Liberty to those in power at your own peril.

The Founders knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote our Constitution.

"Resistance to sudden violence, for the preservation not only of my person, my limbs, and life, but of my property, is an indisputable right of nature which I have never surrendered to the public by the compact of society, and which perhaps, I could not surrender if I would." (John Adams, Boston Gazette, Sept. 5, 1763, reprinted in The Works of John Adams 438 [Charles F. Adams ed., 1851])

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. " (Noah Webster, "An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution," 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56 [New York, 1888])

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 [Univ. of Alabama Press,1975])

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed ― unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (The Federalist, No. 46 at 243- 244)

Madison Library


No comments:

Post a Comment