It Is Not The Guns; It Is The Agenda

Two percent of violent crimes are committed with rifles. None were military rifles with selective or fully-automatic firing capabilities.

The Ruger 22 is a classic example. It can look like a kid's gun with a simple wooden stock and iron sights. For a few dollars, it can look like an AK-47, an M-4, an M-16, or any number of other semi-automatic rifles. It is still dangerous; it is still the same rifle; it is still just another firearm used for shooting targets, firearms training, and small game.

The .223 is just a more powerful 22 caliber rifle that is either a bolt or a semiautomatic action. The most accurate and most destructive firearms are not usually semiautomatics. Rifles are only involved in 38 deaths, according to Feinstein, and the majority off fatalities were committed by three criminals who did not have legal access to the firearms.

Most shootings involving multiple victims are in "gun free" zones where legal firearm owners are prohibited to carry their lawfully purchased, possessed, and safe firearms. Had a CCW citizen been in the movie theater in Colorado, the mass shooting would have been stopped, as it was in Washington State, or the church, on the same weekend.

The shooting at the school ended when the first police officer with a gun arrived. Neither of these shooters were legal firearm owners. Both were criminals prior to their act. Both were identified as not being old enough, or their histories of behavioral and emotional disturbances would have prevented ownership.

The issue is not background checks. People are checked (100%) in stores and at the gun shows in accordance with ATF rules. ATF will not allow private transfers and sales to be reported, nor does the ATF allow people who are not in the business to apply for FFL license. They could fix this without any changes to the 2nd Amendment. Legal gun owners would flock for the permits.

The 2nd Amendment is about self-protection. During the Revolution, Civil War, WWI, and WWII, civilians had the best weapons. Colt was a civilian, the military did not want his rifles or revolvers. They used single shot weapons. A civilian invented the machine gun. An enlisted soldier invented the AK-47 in his spare time. The government has never been able to protect the citizens prior to a disaster. Most of the times, the enemy of the civilian was the government (Monarchies, Dictatorships, Despots, Presidents, and People's Committees, and more). Government could not protect us from the gangsters or the Mob. Government does not protect our boarders from drug gangs bringing their drugs and guns from MEXICO  to kill unarmed US citizens. Our streets are over-run with gangs and gang shootings. Where are the police? Where are is the protection?

Finally, ok, let us give up all of our guns, they day after the government gives up its guns - no armed police, no armed militia (reserves), no government selling of guns to gangs or foreign nations. Only a armed military that cannot use its arms in the US. Keep them over seas and keep them on the boarders. 

The End of The Constitution

News Note: States already have begun fighting back, and one state, Missouri, is looking at a plan that would simply cancel any “act, order, law, statute, rule, or regulation of the federal government upon a personal firearm” and make any federal agency trying to enforce such limits guilty of a Class D felony. Read More

An Oregon sheriff says he will not enforce any federal regulation that President Barack Obama lays out in his package of gun control proposals Wednesday.

Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller joins several other public officials across the nation who have decided to square off with the White House even before it outlines what its plans are for expanded measures.

Mueller sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden this week saying he won't enforce any federal regulation "offending the constitutional rights of my citizens." He won't permit federal officers to come to his county to enforce such laws either, he said.

The Founding Fathers were heavily influenced by French philosopher Charles Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu when drafting the Constitution, most notably in connection with the separation of powers.
Born on January 18, 1689, in Bordeaux, France, Montesquieu was trained in the classics as well as the law.  In 1722 he began his literary career when he published The Persian Letters, a famous, insightful satire of Parisian and French society.  Although he published other works as well, his most influential volume was The Spirit of the Laws (1748).

The Founding Fathers, most especially James Madison, drew upon Montesquieu’s theory of the separation of powers when drafting the Constitution.  Montesquieu argued that the best way to secure liberty and prevent a government from becoming corrupted was to divide the powers of government among different actors who would check each other.  For example, Montesquieu warned that “Were the executive power not to have a right of restraining the encroachments of the legislative body, the latter would become despotic; for as it might arrogate to itself what authority it pleased, it would soon destroy all the other powers.”

Madison and the Founding Fathers took heed of Montesquieu’s warning by establishing an independent executive (the President), legislative (the Congress), and judiciary (the Supreme Court) in the federal Constitution.  Madison masterfully protected the separation of powers by establishing a thorough system of checks and balances as well.

Obama has consistently bypassed the separation of powers by legislating and ruling from the executive branch of government. Cap&Trade did not pass a Democrat Senate and House. Obama's 23 Thesis (Executive Orders) has nothing to do with reducing violence. It is a 23 step plan to reinvent government, as Luther reinvent the Catholic religion. Luther did not throw out the Bible; Obama threw out the Constitution.

Obama has consistently been against gun ownership by citizens, even as a state senator where he voted "present" on crime legislation. Obama said crime laws disproportionally effect a certain minority.