GUNS/BARMS

[crazy horse 0]

California Establishes Gun Confiscation Force

http://www.truthandaction.org/california-establishes-gun-confiscation-force/?fbclid=IwAR1GTJgx3SgHDsqUEXr5akWFutXRX9lcygwpfkWzpbU1HqYoDaIJ32_Big0

The gun control lobbies and organizations engage in some of the most backward and dangerous thinking and advocacy in American politics. Their plans won’t work for a number of reasons. The dangers to the Amercian public that they present are profound. In purporting to make Americans safer, their initiatives would do the opposite.

The foundational idea on which the gun-control left builds their policies is that guns are dangerous in the hands of private citizens. The solution then is obvious: Remove those firearms from private citizens. The thinking is that this will reduce gun violence,

Never mind the fact that disarming the American public is utterly unworkable. There are far too many firearms in circulation. Private citizens will demand their Second Amendment rights, and will simply ignore laws that conflict with it. And the very people who we do not want to have guns, violent criminals, are the ones most likely to break any laws to acquire firearms.

California, being a hotbed of liberal thinking and misgovernment, is ready to start a gun confiscation dragnet. More on this dangerous and unconstitutional initiative on page two.

Gun control is one of the stupidest ideas that the left promotes. That is, assuming their goal is to reduce violent crime. If, on the other hand, crime reduction is no big deal, but establishing a completely disarmed citizenry is, then it makes sense.

In other words, gun confiscation is a direct assault on our constitutional right to self-defense. And that includes defense again a government gone rogue. Those who claim that cannot happen here are either deluded, or they actually support the replacement of our constitutional republic by another form government — and by force, if necessary.

Zero Hedge gives us a prelude to what is being planned in California — at least for starters.

An oft-echoed line from the left is “No One Wants To Take Your Guns!” But as Kurt Schlichter notes, this is another classic lie.

In fact, that’s exactly what liberals want to do. How do we know? They tell us when they think we are not looking – and, with more frequency, when we are. It’s fun when they say they don’t want to take your guns, then say you have to give up your ARs. If your opponent is getting wistful about Australia’s gun confiscation, he wants to take your guns.

Let’s get serious. They all want to take your guns. Why? Two reasons. First, it takes power from the citizenry. Liberals love that. Second, gun rights are important to normal Americans because the fact we maintain arms means we are not mere subjects. We are citizens, with the power to defend our freedom. Liberals hate that we have that dignity; taking our guns would humiliate us, and show us who is boss. They want to disarms us not because of the gun crime – name a liberal who wants to really do something about Chicago as opposed to hassling law-abiding normals – but because they hate us and want to see us submit.

Even the Fredocons are getting into the act, which is no surprise since Never Trumpism is always the first step downward to active liberalism. Pseudocon Bret Stephens demanded that America repeal the Second Amendment in the New York Times in October 2017. Fellow puffcon Ross Douthat simpered something similar, and the Captain Stubing of Conservatism, Bill Kristol, tweeted his concurrence.

There’s the left’s thinking, standing naked for all to see. So, based on those twisted ideas, what’s coming to California courtesy of the liberals?

Move to the final page:

There is actually a police force in California whose sole job is just to confiscate guns.

A broad, bald Tennessean, Special Agent Sam Richardson runs a six-person team of California Justice Department agents who are coming for your guns, but only if you no longer have the legal authority to own one in this state that has tightened firearm laws in increments over the years.

His division is the only law enforcement agency in the country assigned specifically to track down and take guns from felons, the mentally ill and others whose Second Amendment rights have been curtailed in court because of public safety concerns.

Notably, WaPo points out that these are the people who even the National Rifle Association says should not have guns, a statement echoing in the aftermath of the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. The program makes California’s gun-control policy perhaps the most aggressive in the nation. A dozen years ago, the state set up a database that flags law enforcement officials when a registered gun owner is convicted of a felony, deemed mentally ill, has received a restraining order or committed one of about 37 qualifying misdemeanors.

The list is known as the Armed Prohibited Persons System, and while it has failed to prevent mass shootings in San Bernardino, Isla Vista and other cities in the state, it has taken tens of thousands of guns out of the hands of people prohibited from having them.

The work of Richardson’s agents is overwhelming, with the number of guns and “prohibiteds” growing faster than the under-resourced teams can take them off the street. So is the ingenuity of those selling guns, and those making guns, and those owning guns, legally or not.

There are 10,226 people on the list statewide. Of those, about 2,000 are in Los Angeles County, a vast urban desert covered by only Richardson’s team and one other.

Does anyone really think that the sole purpose of this effort is restricted to those deemed unsuitable to possess guns?

And who is mentally ill? If you had a period of depression, does that permanently disqualify you from owning a gun? What about if you have some anxiety disorders? Do you really trust liberals with authority to interpret these rules properly? Or will the look to expand definitions to put “dangerous persons” such as those who believe in a strict adherence to a plain reading of the Constitution on the list?

Of course, people who have been convicted of violent felonies, as well as those who have profound mental problems that prevent them from telling reality from fantasy, should not have firearms.

The problem remains that these people will still find a way to get guns. And so will terrorists. Just because we don’t like that does not mean the problem will go away.

The proper solution, one hated by the left, is to put firearms in the hands of peaceful citizens thereby increasing the risk to criminals that they will get shot either before they can commit their crimes, or at least as soon as they start their rampage.

It might not be “nice,” or “tolerant” or whatever useless words the left might like to call such an idea.

But it does have two positive attributes. It is Constitutional. And it works.

We’ll take an armed citizenry over left-wing, unworkable, and dangerous non-solutions any day.