Elected Officials Should Not Have Firearms
Jul 21, 2015 Political, Second Amendment
The draconian rules at the Veteran’s Administration allow a person to be adjudicated as incompetent based solely on the fact the person needs someone else to manage their finances. The only thing needed is that someone has had a fiduciary appointed for them.
There are many reasons a person would have this. Perhaps they suffered an injury that prevents them from properly managing their money. Perhaps they are forgetful for whatever reason. The reality is just because one needs help with finances does not mean they are incompetent and therefore can’t own a firearm.
Given the serious flaws in our school system it is a wonder any graduates can handle their own finances.
The people the VA determines are unable to own firearms have their names entered into the database used for background checks. This is often done as the result of an administrative procedure and the affected person finds out when the letter comes in the mail. Instead of having a court determine incompetency the person must go to court to prove they are not incompetent after the fact.
It appears now as if the government, led by Obama, is working to keep millions of the elderly from being able to buy a firearm. The Social Security Administration has been working in the dark to craft rules on how to report the same things to the database as the VA. Millions of older Americans have a fiduciary appointed and under the ancient rules this will prevent them from owning firearms. The government will deem them incompetent without the benefit of a court hearing.
[note]It is not just the elderly. Many people are on Social Security for some sort of disability and if that includes someone to manage finances those folks could be in jeopardy.[/note]
This is just one more reason to get rid of Social Security and replace it with private accounts that people actually own.
If the inability to manage finances is sufficient cause to deny firearm ownership then no one in Congress or the White House should ever be allowed to own a firearm. None of them are able to manage money and they publicly demonstrate their incompetence each and every day.
Hell, the same holds true for elected officials at the state and local level in many parts of the country.
But why stop with them? If you need welfare then you have someone managing your finances by paying your bills for you. If that is the case then you should not be allowed to own a firearm.
It is time for the VA to change the rules. It is way past time that incompetence in these cases is determined by the courts and not bureaucrats who are paid bonuses for disarming veterans.
And it is well past time for government to stay out of our lives.
For those who think Obama has given up on disarming the people think again. All tyrants disarm the people before they can ruthlessly control them.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: Congress, firearms, Second Amendment, social security, white house
The Pope Is Not A Christian
Jun 22, 2015 General, Second Amendment
Pope Francis is off his rocker in many ways and how the Catholics ended up with him is a mystery. His papacy is another thing that makes me happy that I left the Catholic religion many years ago. Perhaps I should rephrase that. I did not leave the church, it left me.
The Pope had another stupid thing to say this past week when he stated that people involved in the arms trade of making weapons can’t really call themselves Christians.
He then went on to say that those who profit from the arms trade (by investing in it) are really no better and, as I read it, can’t be Christians either.
The Vatican has armed guards. They have swords and halberds and they also have modern firearms like Glock and SIG Sauer pistols and Steyr machine pistols as well as submachine guns such as the H&K MP5A3.
So the Vatican has invested in firearms (by purchasing them) which means the Pope can’t be a Christian.
It should come as no surprise that the Catholic leader is a hypocrite. That religion is the one that preaches against abortion and then endorses politicians who support abortion and allow it to be paid for with taxpayer money. This is the religion that refuses to excommunicate Catholic politicians who support items contrary to the rules of the church (like abortion).
This is the same church that covered up the numerous child molestation cases where priests had sex with children.
Yes, the Catholic Church even supported Obamacare and then had to fight in court to keep from following certain parts of the law.
The Pope thinks that arms dealers are merchants of death. This is not true. The firearm is an inanimate object that has many uses. People and countries that use them to murder are the true merchants of death.
Dear Pope, the commandment is Thou shall not murder, not thou shall not kill. Killing is a legal taking of life. David killed with a stone and it was justified. Cain murdered with a rock, it was not.
I know you and the rest of those who follow your every word and think it means something important all believe if we got rid of all these firearms people from around the world would hold hands and sing Kumbaya.
The reality is there will always be evil and all it needs to do harm are people like you who are unwilling to confront it with superior force.
Don’t worry Pope, you have guards to protect you and the sheep in society have us guard dogs to protect them from the wolves.
If that makes us or the people who manufacture arms non-Christian in your eyes, well I imagine we can live with that because you don’t get to define us; it is really not your place to judge. I would recommend you reread Matthew 7:1.
Maybe you should stick to the Catholics and leave the rest of us the hell alone.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: christians, firearms, hypocrite, judgement, pope francis, socialist
Why Shop At An Unsafe Mall?
Feb 28, 2015 Second Amendment
The Mall of America has a policy that bans guns from its premises. Law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry firearms on the property (or at least inside the mall itself) but this policy will do little to stop lawbreakers from entering the mall with firearms and causing all kinds of destruction.
There are threats from terrorist groups where lone wolf terrorists have been asked to attack malls in the US and the Mall of America is on the list of targets. The solution the mall has come up with is for the law abiding to leave their firearms in their cars or at home thus making them sheep.
[note]People who shoot back have a better chance of survival when attacked by a bad guy with a gun.[/note]
What will the mall do? It might hire private security or police officers might be assigned to the property. Neither is effective. Hundreds of law abiding gun owners with their guns are a much more deadly foe than cops or security guards scattered throughout. Besides, wouldn’t it be better if the cops were out patrolling the streets?
The mall has basically told would be attackers that the place is a shooting gallery and invited them in. If it had instead published that it wants and encourages gun owners to carry on the property would be bad guys would think twice before attacking. Bad people do not like to attack those who can and will fight back. They like to pick the weak and unprotected. This is why mass shootings happen at places where guns are banned like malls, theaters and schools.
You have never seen a mass shooting at a gun show.
My suggestion is to avoid the place and any other that does not allow people to exercise their right to keep and bear arms. If you are not able to protect yourself then you will not be safe. The government and private businesses are unable to protect you and if you are harmed they will not take responsibility for your injuries.
If enough people stay away from the mall to cause it financial distress and cite the gun ban as the reason the mall’s management will quickly change its mind. If not then a lot of anti gun folks will shop there in their deluded world where they think they are safe. Let them be the targets. Stay home or shop where you are encouraged to carry your firearm.
America was founded by people with guns and our history includes armed people ensuring their own safety and the safety of their neighbors. Instead of being the Mall of America perhaps it should be the Mall of un-American Values…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: anti gun, firearms, law abiding, lies, mall of america, Second Amendment
Supreme Court To Take Up Gun Rights Case
Oct 22, 2014 Second Amendment
The Supreme Court passed over major gun issues this past year. The Court had an opportunity to look at several cases that would have given it a chance to clear up some issues regarding the Second Amendment. The Court decided that it was better to leave things murky.
The Court did though, take up a case of a felon who has firearm issues. A former border patrol agent was convicted of a felony and had to surrender all his firearms. He foolishly surrendered them to the government rather than transferring them to his wife or another family member (or just selling them).
He wanted his guns back so that he could sell them or transfer them to his wife. The government will not let him have them back.
I feel for this guy in that those firearms are his property and he should have been able to sell them to get money for his family. Instead the guns are in the hands of the government which means he will likely never see them again.
Unless, of course, the Supremes decide that he has a right to his firearms so he can dispose of them in a manner more beneficial to his family.
I am glad the Court took this case but I am left wondering why it passed on all the cases that affect LAW ABIDING citizens who are being infringed upon by out of control state and federal governments.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: felon, firearms, infringe, Second Amendment, supreme court
Feinstein Drones On
Mar 17, 2014 Political
Dianne Feinstein has no problem with the government using drones. There is evidence that she is concerned about police use of drones without some kind of oversight but she has no problem with big government using drones to spy on Americans. She has no problem with the NSA spying on Americans.
That changes a bit when she is one of the Americans being spied on. There have been revelations that the NSA has been spying on members of Congress. That is not sitting well with people like Feinstein who have stated that we need such spying for national security.
[note]We need it for national security, the cry of tyrants everywhere.[/note]
It also appears as if Feinstein is not happy with unregulated drones that are used by private citizens to invade privacy, at least not her privacy. Code Pink folks were demonstrating at her home over government surveillance and according to Feinstein she looked out her window and there was a drone looking back.
It was probably some small craft that was privately owned (it was claimed that it was a toy helicopter) but it was invading her privacy and she did not like it.
So what to do what to do. Like everything else in life Feinstein thinks government needs to regulate private drones. You got that? It is OK, in her mind, for the government to use drones to spy on citizens but if citizens use their own drones to spy back well that is a different story.
Feinstein has indicated that we need to do this spying for national security. Well if that is the case then spying on members of Congress would be a better use of our assets with regard to national security. Congress is more dangerous to this nation than its citizens and politicians like Feinstein are the most dangerous.
This idea that citizens need to be regulated but government (or its elitists) does not should not surprise you. Feinstein wants to take every firearm from every citizen. She has called for a complete ban on guns and said she would confiscate them if she could. Feinstein authored the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban.
This is the same Feinstein who had a concealed carry permit in the past because of threats she received. She thought she would be safer carrying a gun so she got a permit (something that the average Joe in CA has a hard time doing) but she wants to take the firearms from everyone else. She is more important than us.
So it is no stretch to see how she would be upset that a group demonstrating government surveillance used the same kind of surveillance to make a point.
She did not like it one bit.
But only because it was directed toward her. When it is directed toward YOU it is necessary and we serfs should just shut up and bow down to our overlords.
But, but, Dianne, if you have nothing to hide why would you worry?
The morons in California will probably never vote her out of office. On a positive note she is 80 and time is not on her side…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: dianne feinstein, drones, elitists, firearms, gun control, lies, nsa, surveillance