After the latest shooting at Fort Hood, which was committed by a mentally-ill soldier with a spotty performance record, who was on numerous psychotropic medications, who never saw any combat (and thus the anti-military liberals cannot chalk up the crime to PTSD), the cry has once again gone out to leave law-abiding gun owners alone and go after crazy people to keep them from getting guns.
And as I said before, this is a dangerous position for a gun owner to take.
We have all seen how the justice system has twisted itself into a pretzel to ignore due process for gun owners when there is an unproven allegation of domestic violence. Gun owners used to be safe in their second amendment rights until they had been convicted of a violent felony. No longer. An unproven allegation of a misdemeanor is all that it takes to lose your second amendment rights.
And when gun owners mindless declare that the government should “take guns away from crazy people”, they forget that the people who would decide what constitutes “crazy” are the same people who have openly declared themselves to be irrationally anti-gun. Medicine is notorious for pursuing fads and junk science; to expect them to respect the second amendment is dangerously naive. And most of them cannot reach a scientifically-valid consensus on the definitions of most mental illnesses. They just publish laundry lists of symptoms to define an illness, many of which are redundant with the descriptions of other mental illnesses.
Blaming the psychotropic drugs is a risky path as well. I think that the drugs themselves are dangerous. And the conditions for which they are described can be hazardous as well. But can any of us guarantee that the AMA won’t advise the government to ban anyone who has ever taken an anti-depressant, anti-anxiety or mood stabilizer medication from gun ownership forever? How many troubled people would deny their problems and avoid treatment to preserve their rights?
What has not happened is any serious evaluation of the foolish prohibition on gun ownership in military facilities. The military gun-free zones have proven to be deadly to law-abiding service personnel, and the military has proven to be criminally inept in keeping illegal guns out as well as tardy and inadequate in their responses to violent acts on their property. The base commander at Fort Hood should be in the stockade for his failure to protect those people under his authority.
But be careful in calling for action against crazy people owning guns. You might just find yourself labeled “crazy”.
You may have heard the story about the Florida gun owner who was pulled over while driving through Maryland:
A troubling story on all counts, but disturbingly vague on specifics.
Well, you really need to read the background on how/why it happened:
So, to sum up: legally owning a gun in your home state is considered probable cause for arresting you in other states despite, not breaking any laws in those other states. Gun ownership = the new scarlet letter. Another step towards stigmatizing gun owners.
The other lesson to be drawn from this incident (and all of the NSA stories, and the IRS attacking anyone that disagrees with 0bama, etc.) is that the noose of government is getting tighter around all of our necks.
For years, I avoided buying an EZ-Pass (remote toll-deduction widget for your car) due to privacy concerns. Looks like technology has leapfrogged me. It is only a matter of time before speeding tickets are issued automatically.
Rather than simply be outraged at this story, I hope you are going to get more involved in the political process to try and reverse the disturbing mission creep of our government.
And, I hope that you start paying attention to the cameras you see attached to municipal vehicles and near roads. And to the roads where you don’t see them. And to the gun laws of the states you drive through.
Interesting new development in this story:
“Were the feds using Maryland to establish the protocols ? It sure seems that is a very strong possibility…… and, if so, the denial of the FOIA would make even more sense.”
To those of you who reside in CT and own an “assault weapon” or a magazine that can hold 11 or more bullets: the deadline for registering them is December 31. Meaning, your registration application must be postmarked by December 31, 2013.
Before you make a decision on whether or not to comply with Gov. Malloy’s Gestapo, you must understand that a separate “assault rifle” registration form must be completed for each gun you intend to register. And that each of those forms must have your right thumbprint on it, and be notarized. And each form must include a copy of the original purchase receipt or DPS-3-C form that was filled out at the time of purchase to prove that you owned the gun prior to April 4, 2013. In the absence of those sale documents, you must include a signed & notarized affidavit with each form attesting to the fact that you owned the gun prior to 4/4/13. Free advice: print extra forms and thumbprint the blanks until you get clear images, then fill out those forms.
For magazines, you can register multiple calibers/capacities on a single form, and no notary is required. Once again, you are required to provide a receipt or affidavit to attest that you owned the magazines prior to 4/4/13. But the affidavit must be notarized!
The forms you need:
The legwork required to complete this process is significant. You must do an inventory (and it had better be accurate!). Figure out which items are covered by the poorly-written law. Fill out forms, do thumbprints, get them notarized. And if you are smart, you will submit them by certified or registered mail. So if you haven’t started, you had better start soon.
The decision to comply, or not comply, with this Nazi-inspired registration scheme is not one to be taken lightly. I offer no advice on that topic.
I will say that the law states that you must keep the “assault weapon” certificate (which the DPS will return to you after they process it) with the “assault weapon” at all times (so you had better find a way to protect it from damage!). And also that the State already has a database of DPS-3-C forms from the purchase of all guns.
And that the law says you are permitted to transport the “assault weapon” to a place of sale/repair or to a shooting range, but NOT to any other destination. Which means that if you plan to stop for a burger on the way home from the range, you might become a felon.
Not sure whether to conclude this post by saying: Caveat Emptor …or: Arbeit Macht Frei.
Well, to anyone that was paying attention to who Barack Obama really was when he first ran for U.S. Senate, it was clear that he was a calculating socialist with a well-funded public-relations team. A look at the traitorous mob that he surrounded himself with (the Chicago Machine, Bill Ayers, etc.) cemented the impression that his true values were unAmerican to the core.
But he was an eager, brazen liar, and he employed many other liars (of various skill levels of lying), and he had the zealous unquestioning support of the liberal media behind him. And he coasted into office despite his lack of qualifications and many unanswered questions about his past.
Since taking office, he has put into motion a wide variety of schemes to undermine the traditional American way of life and traditional social values. Some were overt maneuvers; some were hidden. But all were calculated to adhere to his mentor Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.
How much do you exercise your gun rights on an average day?
Have you ever thought about what you would do on an day that was not average?
During the Boston Bomber manhunt, many hands were wrung over the dubiously-legal lockdown imposed upon Massachusetts residents.
During the manhunt for trigger-happy Chris Dorner, lockdowns were once again employed.
Well, it just happened again: