Democrats Abandon Proposed Assault Weapons Ban

Reuters / Joshua Lott

Published time: March 19, 2013 23:07

With the US Senate set to mull new gun legislation this April, a proposed ban on assault weapons will no longer be up for debate, the proposal’s sponsors say. As a result, the ban is almost surely off the table for inclusion in a new law.

California Democrat Dianne Feinstein, who promoted the ban, told the press that Nevada’s Harry Reid made the concession with a view to avoiding Republican sabotage. Leaving out the assault weapons ban, she reasoned, would prevent the debate on gun control from being blocked by Republicans before it even began.

I very much regret it,” Feinstein, who wrote the 1994 assault weapons ban that expired ten years later, said of the decision. “I tried my best.”

Instead of debating a ban on military-style weapons up front, Feinstein will propose the measure as an amendment once legislation is in order. The ban could be on thin ice as it faces near-certain rejection from Republicans across the board as well as some Democrats.

A ban would need 60 votes to even be in the running for legislative action.

The Senate is home to 53 Democrats, as well as two independents who can be relied upon to vote to the left. But even “Using the most optimistic numbers,” Reid said, the ban would receive fewer than 40 votes.

I’m not going to try to put something on the floor that won’t succeed. I want something that will succeed. I think the worst of all worlds would be to bring to something to the floor and it dies there,” Reid said.

In order to get support, Feinstein says, the Senate will first vote on assault weapons in general – including a ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. After that, a vote on high-capacity magazines would be taken to the floor.

A discussion on banning military-style weapons for civilian purchase in the US started up after years of dormancy following the December 2012 massacre at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. In January US President Barack Obama publicly commented on such a ban in response to the Sandy Hook attack.

Restricting gun ownership and use is a majorly controversial issue in the US, where many believe the country’s constitution provides full protection of gun ownership, no matter what the style, under the law.

However, the Senate Judiciary Committee has approved four gun control measures in March 2013 alone, including the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The other two would see the expansion of federal background checks on individuals purchasing weapons, make punishments for illegal weapons trafficking more severe and up funding for school safety.

Source

 

Citizens’ Message to Congress: You Want My Gun? Come and Take It—Radio Spot

People are coming up with all kinds of creative ways to “BE” and “DO”, aren’t they? Kudos! I’m impressed.

“COME AND TAKE IT” is a catchy tune with a clear message. Getting it on the radio in Washington would be fabulous and ground-breaking.

If we do what we’ve always done and quietly accept whatever the shadow government dishes out, it’s the same as saying, “Okay, I guess it’s alright with me” —and that’s how we got into this mess in the first place: APATHY.

We trusted our governments to do the right thing and take care of us; to do what’s right and lawful and ethical. Bad idea. We gave away our freedom.

The last of our rights and freedoms are now circling the drain. The United States’ Constitution is in tatters. We need to UNdo what we allowed the elite to do.

If you can help get this message out, now is the time. We don’t have to play the victim.

The entire world is watching, America. If the Illuminati can take down the Republic of the United States, they can easily control the rest of the world.

This tune may very well become the new “Battle Hymn of the Republic”. It’s a peaceful way to continue the dialogue with the powers that were and present “our side”; the view of the 99 per cent; to show that we’re awake and aware and in control.

I’ve noticed that although space ships and coffin liners at FEMA camps may lay beyond the scope of the sleeping masses’ capacity to accept the truth, when you start talking about taking away their guns and ammo—many are paying attention and willing to speak up. Somehow that doesn’t fall into the realm of a “conspiracy theory”.

Hearing an ad like this on the radio may be just the ticket to show them that they’re not alone; that this is a serious issue that many others are willing to take action to prevent and that it’s time to rally into a force to be reckoned with; to take a stand and make their voices heard.

If our sheriffs aren’t going to tolerate gun confiscation, that speaks volumes, doesn’t it?

I’m thinking that this whole gun control issue may be a blessing in disguise; that it may be THE catalyst that SINGLE-HANDEDLY wakes up a large segment of the population that nothing else could.

The lights will start winking on and they’ll be able to see reality for what it is, and they will rise up and slay the beast—metaphorically speaking, of course. We don’t want to see any actual battles, blood, or loss of life. No shots fired.

But if need be, there are many patriots willing to lay down their life. They won’t lay down their guns, because they know if they do, it’s all over for America—and the citizens of the world. Unarmed, there is no protection from a tyrannical government. History has proven that again and again, and that is why there are militias in America.

Advertising is expensive. Perhaps you would like to help the cause by purchasing this ad on iTunes…

COME AND TAKE IT

by Steve Vaus

Posted on 01/31/2013

The President and members of Congress have been making a lot of noise about restricting our gun rights. Now they will hear from US.

We’re buying radio air time in Washington, D.C. to broadcast this messageLISTEN HERE

Help get it heard.

The song in the video & radio ad is ‘COME AND TAKE IT’ by Steve Vaus.

Listen at this link.  Available to purchase from the iTunes store.

Source

Sandy Hook School Not Even Operating at Time of Shooting; Adam Lanza Never Existed

Here’s some new info coming forward to cloud the issues even further. Talk about a fabricated reality. Add this to the Mayan Temple theory—and you’ve got one of the wildest events in recent history—rivaling 9-11. I’d say as far as THIS rabbit hole goes, we’re still falling.

They botched their plan royally, but this time We, The People, didn’t wait 2 years to realize it. We’re not buyin’ it!

Wednesday, January 30th, 2013

The Nexus of Tyranny: The Strategy Behind Tucson, Aurora and Sandy Hook

Sandy Hook poses so many uncertainties and even contradictions that it should come as no surprise that virtually every aspect of whatever happened is being subjected to the most minute scrutiny.  I have now published multiple articles about it here at Veterans Today, including “Sandy Hook: Huge Hoax and anti-Gun ‘Psy Op’”, where others, such as historian of science and expert on 7/7, Nicholas Kollerstrom, have addressed the parallels between those events.  On one web site, I have even been asked by a serious but skeptical reader whether it is even possible that none of the children were actually killed.

The question is not as unwarranted as most of the public might believe. If this had been a real shooting of children, there would have been a sense of panic and of hysteria. EMTs would have rushed into the school building. The children would have been rushed out on stretchers and into ambulances and other vehicles and rushed to a hospital for doctors to treat them and formally pronounce the death of those who had been killed. Nothing remotely like this happened. The police cordoned off everyone from the school. No one was allowed to see the bodies. They were transported in the dead of night.  It was simply bizarre beyond belief. A resourceful student has turned up visual evidence that Sandy Hook was not even an operating school, which, if she is right, discloses the stunning enormity of the hoax:

These considerations already indicate that Sandy Hook was a fabricated or staged event. I wish it were not the case, but that conclusion is reinforced by multiple peculiarities about photographs and other matters, extending to conflicting reports about whether the alleged shooter, Adam Lanza, was a student at the school or not; whether his mother was a teacher there or not; police radio reports in real time of two perps heading toward the reporting officer, one of whom was apprehended, the other fled into the woods and was tracked in helicopter footage.  Concern that this is an elaborate “psy op” to create hysteria in the hearts of the American people and bring about a stampede of public support for the confiscation of every semi-automatic weapon in the country, as Sen. Diane Feinstein’s bill would impose, are open to serious question in light of the discovery that, in the Social Security Death Index, Adam Lanza is reported to have died on the 13th, the day before the “massacre”:

After all, if Adam died the day before, he cannot have slaughtered those 20 children and six adults (seven, including his mother) on the following day.  And the matter has been compounded by the rediscovery that all three of the major networks–ABC, NBC and CBS–reported that his body had been found accompanied by hand  guns (whose numbers range from two to four), while the alleged “assault right” was left in the car!  The reporter all confirmed that they had verified the information they were presenting with state and federal officals.  But if these murders were committed with hand guns, then the justification for a ban on assault weapons on the basis of these events is non-existent.  Indeed, it appears that the  Sandy Hook story  is turning out to be a much bigger event than it would have been had it actually been authentic.

As a former Marine Corps officer who qualified with a .45 and a rifle four years in a row (from 1962-66) and occasionally shot expert with the M-14, I have found it very difficult to imagine how this young man of slight build, who appears to have had little or even no marksmanship training, could possibly have pulled it off.  I supervised marksmanship at Edson Range, Camp Pendleton, as a Series Commander at the USMC Recruit Depot, San Diego, CA, and the ratio of target to kills strikes me as not merely extremely improbable but virtually impossible, especially if he was using hand guns but even with a Bushmaster.  And the probability that he killed anyone on the 14th when he appears to have died on the 13th does not require emphasis.  An especially informative interview recently took place between Joyce Riley and Mike Powers on “The Power Hour”:

The New York Times has entered the fray by publishing “Reliving Horror and Faint Hope at Massacre Site” (28 January 2013), in which it recounts the horrific experiences of five of law enforcement officers who were among the first on the scene at Sandy Hook.  Like many other articles about the shooting, it makes a strong appeal to the emotions but is short on proof:

NEWTOWN, Conn. — The gunfire ended; it was so quiet they could hear the broken glass and bullet casings scraping under their boots. The smell of gunpowder filled the air. The officers turned down their radios; they did not want to give away their positions if there was still a gunman present.

They found the two women first, their bodies lying on the lobby floor. Now they knew it was real. But nothing, no amount of training, could prepare them for what they found next, inside those two classrooms.

“One look, and your life was absolutely changed,” said Michael McGowan, one of the first police officers to arrive at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14, as a gunman, in the space of minutes, killed 20 first graders and 6 adults.

Questions that are not explored by The New York Times include why there were no EMTs rushing to aide the victims, why there was no rash of ambulances to transport them to the hospital, why the officers on the scene were the ones to declare them dead, and why not even their parents were allowed to identify their children.  Too tough for The Times, it appears.

As Miles Mathis has observed in “Sandy Hook Conspiracy Theories debunked? No”, the government likes to hire people to run this gambit:

[T]hey publish some ridiculously weak response as a debunking, it utterly fails to debunk anything, but then simply because it got published by top outlets they claim the theory has been debunked.  Go study just about any tragedy or big news story of the past 50 years, and you will see the same progression. [Specifically, you can study Popular Mechanics' pathetic efforts to debunk 911 Truth by this method.]   But I have news for them, publishing an article with the title Debunked does not automatically mean the theory has been debunked.  You actually have to make a strong argument.  Blowing smoke for a couple of pages isn’t a debunking, it is just more propaganda, and most people who read these things can see that.  The debunking of 911 didn’t work, because the debunking was exponentially weaker than the data it was trying to debunk.Most people now recognize that fact.  We are seeing the same thing here with Sandy Hook.

To prove this, Miles Mathis goes “point for point” through the debunking of Salon writer Alex Seitz-Wald, demonstrating that he has done no more than deploy “3rd-string debating tricks and cold cabbage” and that his title constitutes a case of false advertising, “Your comprehensive answer to every Sandy Hook conspiracy theory”.  Indeed, a he also explains, there are also multiple indications that photos have been shopped, including this “Christmas pose” by the Robbie Parker family, whose daughter, Emily, appears to have posted with President Obama when he visited Newtown to convey his sympathies. which has been scrutinized in several venues.  An excellent discussion of some of these issues includes of this photograph:

Among the oddities in this case–where the image of Emily on the right appears to have been added in and she is not being encompassed by her father’s arms–is the prevalence of “threes” among the fingers that are being displayed. Her mother on the left has two fingers melded together to create the image of three and Robbie himself is displaying three on each hand, while the youngest not only is showing three with her right but creating an image associated with Satanic worship with her mouth and hand.  Even the other daughter, Madeleine, seems to have made a similar sign with her partially obscured hand.  Without alleging a connection to the Church of Satan, which has an active chapter in Newtown, CT, it seems rather bizarre.  Other sites offer more extensive and detailed analysis of possible photographic fakery, including the use of “green screens” and that Adam Lanza appears to have died the day before.

In the following essay, Dennis Cimino does his best to sort out what has been going on across the country, because Sandy Hook appears to be the lastest in a series of contrived events of increasing violence, which may be designed to motivate the American people to surrender their Second Amendment rights and embrace all-encompassing forms of gun control, which has already happened in New York.

The new legislation includes items such as police registry of assault weapons, limiting the number of bullets in magazines and more preventative measures to keep firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill. The proposal would target not just the sale of new assault weapons, but also those already in private hands.

Current and future owners will be mandated to register the weapons, creating a paper trail even for secondhand firearms. New sales would require background checks, and the sale of assault weapons on the internet would be banned entirely.

At the moment, assault weapon owners are allowed to possess ten bullets, but with the proposal, this number would be reduced to seven, with the penalty of a misdemeanor charge if caught with more than eight bullets.

Those who know that the Department of Homeland Security has acquired 1.5 billion rounds of .40 caliber, hollow-point ammunition, which is not even permissible in combat under the Hague Convention of 1899; that there are more than 300 FEMA camps around the country for the concentration of dissidents; and that a Senate Subcommittee on Homeland Security and Intelligence has concluded that any domestic “terrorist threat” is either negligible or even non-existent has to ask why a department with no foreign obligations would need to acquire such a massive stockpile of ammunition of that kind–and has now requisitioned 7,000 assault rifles for its own “protection”.  These are not speculations, but brute facts.

Whether or not the draconian gun control measures enacted by New York virtually overnight are going to have the intended effect, however, is very much an open question.  My own opinion–as a former Marine Corps officer but also a retired college professor–is that the country is on the verge of a massive civil war, which may even be the outcome that the traitors desire, where those who attempt to enforce these new measured may find themselves the targets of retaliation:

Yes, we are talking about the potential of a New York guerilla war where those who participate in gun confiscation are put on “fair game” lists to be targeted and taken out. This is what is being discussed across the ‘net, on blogs, in personal conversations, on radio shows and elsewhere.

I was as surprised to learn this as you may be right now. The reaction to Cuomo’s gun grab has been outspoken and powerful. Apparently I am not the only one in America who has committed to defending my liberties with my life, if necessary. There are a great many law-abiding citizens of this country who have joined together in saying “THIS is our line in the sand! Do NOT cross this line!”

Cuomo has crossed that line, and although for the record I do not advocate the use of violence to resolve conflicts, I cannot help but admit that Cuomo may very well be placing his own life, the life of his family members, and the lives of his staffers in imminent danger if he does not reverse his decision. What’s brewing right now is a kind of civil war in New York, and there are apparently all kinds of gun owners across the state who are prepared to die rather than register their firearms.

In “Israel’s Plan for World War enters high gear”, Gordon Duff, Senior Editor of Veterans Today, outlines the world-wide implications of the confiscation movement taking place here in the United States and how it possibly fits into the broader Israeli agenda, where those of us who have suggested that the Mossad may have been behind Sandy Hook–even if that was only in part–are looking better and better with the passage of time:

In 1878, congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act. From Cornell Law School, “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse Comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

Current police organizations, now under control of “Fusion Centers” run by the Department of Homeland Security, and armed with heavy military weapons, are directly in violation of this act and are, thus, in unconstitutional.

However, search of Google and Wikipedia will show systematic cleansing and editing to obscure this vital American safeguard. Google, Youtube and Wikipedia have long been used by Israeli intelligence as “playgrounds” for game theory warfare against America.

Dividing America and pushing it to the edge of civil war is the task of the Israel lobby led by Senator’s Feinstein and Schumer. With the support of the largest police organization, the IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police), Feinstein’s bill is filled with “stealth” provisions for gun inspections in homes, special licensing and is aimed at disarming veterans.

Enacting AIPAC’s gun confiscation law will require, not only the shelving of the constitution’s second amendment, but the first, fourth, fifth, ninth and tenth as well.

Any bill that mandates “storage” and “transportation” will establish databases, endless paid informants and illegal searches of all persons, properties and vehicles without “probable cause.”

With full support of police organizations, fully militarized and Israeli controlled, at the behest of key Israeli members of the US government, an undeniable effort to bring America to civil war is fully underway as we speak.

While Gordon Duff (above) and Dennis Cimino (below) both posit Zionists promoting Israel as the main group wanting to disarm the US general population–both to help their wars and to subordinate the American people to politicians whom they can largely control–there are many other diverse elements in the international banking and domestic gun-confiscating movement whose interests do not always converge with those of Israel, which should be borne in mind in evaluating the situation. The gun agenda has become preeminent–and it is being driven by multiple motives. The roles of the Mossad, the CIA and DHS have become increasingly difficult to sort out, where even our best efforts may fall short. The goal of gun control is to reduce our ability to resist tyranny!

|

Read the rest of the article…

Local Sheriffs Obliged to Protect Americans’ Guns

A high-profile former sheriff who once sued the U.S. government over its gun regulations – and won – says it’s the local sheriff who will have to defend Americans when and if the feds start banning and confiscating guns.

Richard Mack, a former sheriff in Graham County, Ariz., joined with then-Ravalli County Sheriff Jay Printz in a lawsuit against Washington when Bill Clinton demanded sheriffs enforce provisions of the Brady Bill gun-control law.

He won. And since then he’s been at the front of a movement that highlights the responsibility of local sheriffs.

Now, as Washington gears up to consider imperious plans to limit guns, require fingerprinting and registration, impose additional taxes and fees, ban particular features or functions outright, and even confiscate weapons of self-defense, Mack has told WND that there’s hope remaining in local law enforcement.

It’s not complicated, he said.

“Gun control is illegal, and it’s against the Constitution,” he said. “What people don’t realize is that the Second Amendment was designed to protect us from the power of the federal government.”

He said he would expect sheriffs across the country to defend the rights of ordinary Americans.

“I hope and pray America’s sheriffs won’t allow any more gun control,” Mack said. “The sheriffs need to be united in letting the federal government know that we’re not going to allow it.

“In the ’90s when I was the sheriff of Graham County, Ariz., we worked with other sheriffs and stopped two or three Brady Bills,” he recalled, a fight that he’s been detailing in seminars with sheriffs.

He said the office is critical, as it’s not only in law enforcement, but also is elected directly by the people.

“Out of 200 sheriffs with whom I’ve met, I’ve only had one give me a wishy-washy answer. That one said he would try to take the federal government to court,” Mack said. “Most of them have said they would lay down their lives first rather than allow any more federal control. They also said they would do everything they could to stop gun control and gun confiscation.”

Alan Stang at News With Views wrote about another battle Mack encountered while sheriff. A bridge had washed out and parents were driving children 26 miles to school, which physically was located only half a mile across a river.

The county decided the fix the bridge and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers warned that an environmental study alone would take 10 years. Mack promised to provide protection for the workers, and said he’d call out a posse if needed.

The bridge was built.

Stang wrote about other close encounter between sheriffs and the feds:

Find out who is working to aid Barack Obama in the destruction of the 2nd Amendment, in “America Disarmed.”

“In 1997, in Nye County, Nev., federal agents arrived to seize cattle that belonged to rancher Wayne Hage. The sheriff gave them a choice: skedaddle or be arrested. They skedaddled. … In Idaho, a 74-year-old rancher shot an endangered gray wolf which had killed one of his calves. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent three armed agents to serve a warrant. Lemhi County Sheriff Brett Barslou said that was ‘inappropriate, heavy-handed and dangerously close to excessive force.’ More than 500 people turned out for a rally in the small towns of Challis and Salmon to support the sheriff and the rancher and to tell the federal government to back off.”

Mack, who’s written “The Magic of Gun Control,” said if there is an actual specific plan to start taking Americans’ weapons, he expects a response.
“If the federal government wants to start a new Civil War, all they need to do is go ahead with gun confiscation,” Mack said.

Just a day earlier, WND reported that Firearms Coalition Executive Director Jeff Knox said Second Amendment supporters aren’t planning negotiations with Obama over gun control.

“We are not going to back down. We are not going to give in. And we are not going to concede one more inch,” Knox said.

He was responding to questions about America’s response to plans like those from Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to demand gun registration, bans and fingerprinting in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting in Connecticut.

“Unfortunately, the president and other anti-rights politicians are not doing anything to keep what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary from happening again,” he said. “Instead they are going after law-abiding gun owners and targeting commonly owned firearms and ammunition feeding devices. Their proposed restrictions on these items would have had no impact on what happened at Sandy Hook, and, if passed, would not stop the next craven murderer from wreaking just as much havoc and destruction.”

Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt shares Mack’s opinion.

“The county sheriffs need to act and make new deputies to stop federal authority in the counties,” Pratt told WND. “This is a defensible idea. He can deputize people to serve since they are the ones who voted for him to represent them. A lot of citizens would stand up for their Second Amendment rights if they were protected by the sheriff.”

He cited a move that already is surging among states to adopt laws and use the Tenth Amendment to curb federal activity. The Tenth Amendment simply reserves to the states and the people all responsibilities not specifically assigned to Washington in the Constitution.

Pratt noted the move that over the past few years has seen eight states adopt laws that exempt firearms made, sold and kept in the state from federal oversight. The federal government has taken the issue to court, where it remains at this point.

“A number of states are passing laws that use the Tenth Amendment to curb federal control. Their law says that if a gun is made in the state and sold in the state, that the federal government has no control over it,” Pratt said.

He provided additional examples of what already has resulted from sheriffs’ disputes with the feds.

“In Elkhart County, Ind., there was a farmer who produced raw milk. The Department of Justice was investigating the farmer and was trying to shut down the farm,” Pratt said. “Elkhart County Sheriff Brad Rogers defended the farmer by saying that without a warrant signed by a judge and without probable cause, they had no jurisdiction to investigate the farmer within his jurisdiction of Elkhart County.”

“Rogers said that if they didn’t leave, he would arrest them. The DoJ threatened to arrest him, but Rogers sent his deputies to defend the farmer,” Pratt said. “The feds have had to back off.”

He also said local officials in New Mexico burned trees from a small parcel of federal land to halt a raging forest fire.

“The sheriff is the chief officer in the county even on federal land if the land is in the county,” Pratt said.

But Washington is not idle. Barack Obama said he will put the weight of his office behind gun control, and Feinstein even has proposed a federal gun buyback program that has been endorsed by about 40 members of Congress.

Feinstein’s dedication to eliminating the Second Amendment is unquestioned.

The California Democrat was one of sponsors of the so-called “Brady Bill,” the 1995 “assault weapons” ban. Faced with the limitations placed in the version that was making its way through Congress, Feinstein said, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up every gun in America, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in.”

Mack, who is also the founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, said Feinstein is a “polimagician,” a political leader who believes his or her policies will work magic for their constituents.

“They think they’re special and better than everyone else. Feinstein’s [own] concealed carry permit is the product of this elitist attitude,” Mack said. He said Congress and Obama simply are loading their political agenda onto the backs of the victims of Sandy Hook.

He said gun control through history produces one result: “Genocide.” Pratt warned that Washington’s strategy will accomplish nothing but creating vast new ranks of felons in America.

“A lot of Americans spend an awful lot of money on these guns. I don’t think there will be very many who will willingly accept $200 for a gun that they paid $500 to $1,000 for,” Pratt said.

The last two major gun rights cases that went before the U.S. Supreme Court were decided in favor of gun rights, and as a followup the Second Amendment Foundation has been taking on local and state restrictions.

Read more…