Category: citizen disarmament

Off Target

Don’t ignore horrifying attacks on African Christians… Today’s Nigeria does not look like that of my youth. Climate change, capitalism, debt, corruption, the COVID-19 crisis and shifting donor trends have all caused more poverty, less hope and more conflict. [More]

He did it! He missed the barn!

This is “conservative Fox News“?

Figures he’d miss the elephant in the room enabling the genocide.

Go figure. All that death and no white supremacists…

Banking on Disarmament

Major digital currency’s terms of use: No firearm, ammunition purchases [More]

I thought crypto was meant to facilitate freedom, not become a controlling trap.

No way to ensure it’s “legal tender for all debts public and private”…?

And in a tangentially-related development, I’m trying to determine the truth and the timing of this:

[Via WiscoDave]

If We Can’t Believe Authorized Journalists, Who Can We Believe?

Trump administration altering program that was a lifeline for pioneering non-profits helping reduce gun violence [More]

They say that like it’s true and like this is news as opposed to propaganda. A look at the “reporter’s” beat and agenda tells us all we need to know.

But look at this: Asking for reader support from “progressives” apparently works.

Can the same be said about gun owners?

[Via Henry Bowman]

The Clock is Ticking…

…on Second Amendment rights in Oregon. [More]

They’ll still have them. It’s just that the courts, the state and its enforcers won’t recognize them.

This is what happens when Democrats rule and the Republicans are neutered.

This is what happens when citizens by and large succumb to bias and intellectual laziness, and have been indoctrinated into hating an outnumbered minority that still values the truth.

This is what will happen everywhere, in Everytown, should that prevail where we are.

More 2A ‘Task Force’ Treason

But as shown, the Government’s efforts to defend the panel’s decision are all unpersuasive. And the starkness of the Seventh Circuit’s departure from this Court’s precedent— combined with the peculiar and anomalous nature of the restrictions on short-barreled rifles at issue—in fact make this case a particularly suitable vehicle for resolving one or more of these fundamental methodological questions. [More]

So, why is “pro-gun” Pam Bondi’s Justice Department arguing otherwise?

Not that I expect any of the gun groups to resolve these things at a round table that doesn’t exist and they won’t ask for…

[Via Jess]

Along Came Jones

“I’m From the Hood, OK?!” – Texas Democrat State Rep. Jolanda Jones Says She Will Slash Republicans Across the Throat if They Bully Her [More]

Think they’re related…?

Figures Moms Demand/Everyt0wn would endorse her and then not say anything about this. (I hope they take it down because I’ve got a screenshot and it would be fun to see them once more vanish a commie star.)

[Via bondmen]

You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet

An armed gang of shoplifters is terrorizing NYC supermarkets— and grocers say NYPD is ignoring the rampage [More]

So this was a talking point…

Wait ’til Zohran the Red takes over with his peoples’ collective markets, enhanced citizen disarmament, repurposed police, and treatment of criminals as social justice equalizers.

I see some Vichycons are still pushing for gungrabber Curtis to either stay in or to step aside form Cuomo. They can all go to hell– and will. Me, I’m makin’ popcorn.

[Via bondmen]

Quacks Like a Democrat…

Supposed ‘Independent’ Nebraska Senate Candidate is Bankrolled by National Democrats [More]

Yeah, we know.

What are “reasonable gun safety measures,” what does “I am fundamentally in favor of the Second Amendment… We can combat school shootings while protecting the Second Amendment” mean, and how does it fundamentally differ from “I support the Second Amendment BUT we can all agree on commonsense gun safety laws…”?

[Via Michael G]

The Servants Have Spoken

In response to a question of whether the people decide subjectively what they deem appropriate for self-defense, New Jersey argued that “the people” through their representatives decide what is unusually dangerous based on their perception of “objective characteristics.” As one judge suggested, since all firearms are dangerous under the alleged dangerous-or-unusual test, no limit would exist on what the legislature may choose to ban, despite what the people choose. [More]

Look at all the contortions these robed Democrats go through to obfuscate the unambiguous clarity of “shall not be infringed.”

How many horses and hounds may I keep, again…?

[Via Michael G]

Major Victory!

Today, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation and the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) secured a permanent injunction against the State of Virginia’s universal background check law (Virginia Code Section 18.2-308.2:5) in the case of Wilson v. Hanley. [More]

Yeah… except:

I mean, yeah, take the win. But I think we have different definitions “major.”

[Via Jess]

A Forward Progression

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has submitted a comment letter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in support of a proposed rights restoration rule. [More]

They raise a good point:

However, there are some aspects of the Proposed Rule which do not go far enough. As courts have confirmed, the main requirement for disarming Americans—what must be present before they may be disenfranchised from their Second Amendment rights—is ongoing dangerousness.

You know how I feel about ongoing dangerousness.

Sounds Like a Predetermined Outcome to Me

Justices agree to review federal law banning drug users from possessing guns [More]

I see the Trump/Bondi DOJ is selectively defending infringements again.

Could there be a less sympathetic defendant than “a dual citizen of the United States and Pakistan, who was indicted in 2023 on a single count of violating the guns-and-drugs law after the FBI found a 9mm pistol, 60 grams of marijuana, and 4.7 grams of cocaine at his family home” ?

Am I wrong to suspect a way to erode the text, history, and tradition standard and guarantee bad precedent with a case centered on what would have been pretty much an anachronism at the time of the founding?

[Via Jess]

Verified by MonsterInsights