Where is YOUR Line in the Sand?

MY LINE IN THE SAND IS DRAWN HERE!

By Chuck Baldwin
January 4, 2013
NewsWithViews.com

If Barack Obama and his gaggle of gun grabbers have their way, the American citizenry will have all of their firearms taken away. If their current attempt to outlaw semi-automatic rifles is successful, does anyone think it will stop there? Don’t be naïve! The goal of people like Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Charles Schumer, et al., has always been total gun confiscation. In fact, Senator Feinstein is actually on record as saying so.

According to Infowars.com, “Senator Dianne Feinstein’s ultimate plan has always been to have Mr. and Mrs. America turn in their guns to the government, period. Feinstein’s bill would criminalize millions of Americans and completely eviscerate second amendment rights.

“She tells us a gun ban is about saving the children and reducing crime, but her comments on 60 Minutes in 1995 reveal her true plan is to target law-abiding American gun owners.

“On Thursday, Feinstein will introduce her dream bill to disarm the American people. The legislation is open-ended and includes provisions to re-register firearms and submit the fingerprints of law-abiding Americans as if they’re sex offenders.

“Feinstein’s bill will also include a buy-back provision that will allow the government to confiscate all firearms. Both Feinstein and New York governor Andrew Cuomo have said that is their plan.

“It is a gun confiscation bill.

“The proposed bill is open declaration of war on the Second Amendment.

“It’s no coincidence that the communist Chinese, the biggest holders of U.S. debt, have demanded the American people be disarmed. History tells us that it is the instinct of all tyrants to disarm the slaves.”

The report plays a video in which Senator Feinstein said, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up [every gun]… Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in.”

See the report here.

Writing for the National Association for Gun Rights, Dudley Brown said, “After reading Senator Dianne Feinstein’s new so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban, I can only describe it as the effective END of the Second Amendment in America.

“The definition of an ‘Assault Weapon’ in this bill is so broad you can drive a truck through it! They’re targeting EVERYTHING--rifles, shotguns and even handguns.

“You see, the gun-grabbers are going for broke.

“Even owners of supposedly ‘grandfathered’ firearms will be treated like common criminals.

“If passed, Feinstein’s so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban would:

“--Ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of 120 specifically named rifles, shotguns and handguns;

“--Ban the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of ALL firearms with a detachable magazine and at least one ‘military characteristic’--which could mean just about anything that makes a gun ‘look scary.’

“--Bans the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of magazines holding more than 10 rounds;

“--Force owners of ALL ‘grandfathered’ weapons to undergo an intrusive background check and unnecessary fingerprinting;

“--Force owners of ALL ‘grandfathered’ weapons to federally register their guns after obtaining permission slip from local law enforcement showing their guns are not in violation of state or local law. That’s right. If you own a $10 magazine that’s more than 10 rounds, you’ll have to register it with the BATFE in their National Firearms Registry.

“And you and I both know registration is only the first step toward outright confiscation. So don’t be fooled.”

See the report here.

As I stated in this column last week, “The semi-automatic rifle is the vanguard of our liberty; it is the surest and most trustworthy means of our self-defense; and it is the primary companion of any man who would both protect and feed his family.

“Make no mistake about it: to take away an American’s right to a semi-automatic rifle is to FULLY DISARM HIM. There is no Second Amendment; there is no right to keep and bear arms; there is no citizen militia; there is no liberty without the semi-automatic rifle!”

In that column I also quoted Thomas Jefferson who rightly observed, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

See my column here.

And it is Jefferson’s observation that the “strongest reason” that the American people must always retain the right to keep and bear arms is “to protect themselves against tyranny in government,” that is universally ignored in the modern gun-control debate.

Throughout the United States, there are tens of millions of fully-armed citizens who are more than capable of defending themselves and their communities against any enemy--whether that enemy is an internal or external one. In fact, many millions of these citizens have been trained in the US armed forces. Firearms--especially semi-automatic rifles--in the hands of millions of American citizens is truly the only thing that stands between freedom and tyranny for the people of the United States. That Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein want to disarm the American people should be considered an act of war against our liberties! In other words, ladies and gentlemen, this is a line in the sand that none of us can afford to ignore.

Here’s how we must fight:

1. We must literally inundate our US representatives and senators with the most vociferous protest.   We must make sure that every representative and senator in America is told that under no uncertain terms their reelection will be determined by how they vote on this issue. 

Obviously, people such as Senators Feinstein and Schumer come from liberal, anti-gun states--which is why they feel safe in proposing these draconian gun-control measures. However, the vast majority of US House members represent average God-fearing Americans to whom the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct. And make no mistake about it: the legislative battle will be won or lost in the US House of Representatives.

Here in Montana, however, our two US senators (both Democrats) proudly profess to be pro-Second Amendment. Montanans should be sending a strong message to both of these senators to hold the line for our right to keep and bear arms--including semi-automatic rifles. I cannot imagine that any civil magistrate from either major political party could hope to be reelected in the State of Montana who would support Senator Feinstein’s gun-grab bill. And I would hope and pray that there would be dozens of other states in which the Second Amendment is equally honored.

Folks, CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS NOW! If we expect to retain any semblance of freedom for our posterity, we must pick up the phones and barrage our representatives and senators with opposition to this gun-control bill. And we must do it NOW! Furthermore, we must let our elected officials know that under no uncertain terms there can be NO COMPROMISE, that only outright opposition to any new gun-control measures will be deemed acceptable. There are already far too many gun-control laws in this country. We cannot accept any more abridgements and restrictions to our right to keep and bear arms. NO MORE!

2. We must demand of our State governors and legislators that they resist any attempts of the federal government to outlaw our firearms.

Should the Republican-led House of Representatives in Washington, D.C., cave-in to the Obama gun-grab like they did on Obama’s tax increases, it will be up to the states to say NO! If there is a single issue for which individual, sovereign states would be willing to defy the federal government and protect the rights and liberties of their citizens, it will be this issue. 
If the states, and liberty-minded people of the states, do not stand as one on this issue, there is no issue for which they would stand. We either draw the line on this issue or our liberties are gone forever!

This means State legislatures should pass laws defying the federal gun ban and protecting the right of citizens to keep and bear arms within their states. Governors should be willing to utilize State law enforcement agencies to protect their citizens’ right to keep (and not register) their guns, and county sheriffs should stiffen their backs and refuse to allow any federal police agency from enforcing the gun ban. After all, the county sheriff is the highest law enforcement authority in his or her county, trumping even federal law enforcement officers.

3. Individual citizens like you and I must be willing to draw our personal line in the sand on this issue and refuse to comply with any law requiring us to register or surrender our firearms--including our semi-automatic rifles.

Ladies and gentlemen, whatever the consequences might be, and whatever anyone else does or doesn’t do, I am prepared to become an outlaw over this issue! I don’t know how to say it any plainer: I will not register my firearms, and I will not surrender my firearms. Period.

End of story. It’s not just a saying with me: when my guns are outlawed, I will be an outlaw!
It is time RIGHT NOW for every American citizen to make up his or her mind on this issue.
There are many laws, which I personally find repugnant and even unconstitutional, to which I grudgingly submit. For example, while I very much understand, and even philosophically agree with, those who refuse to pay income taxes, I pay income taxes. Even though I believe the income tax to be unconstitutional, onerous, and maybe even nefarious, I have not drawn my line in the sand on that issue. I haven’t drawn a line in the sand on the requirement for all sorts of government licenses, i.e., marriage licenses, driver’s licenses, CCW permits, Social Security cards, etc., even though I personally believe that many requirements for licensure stretch the boundaries of legitimate government. And, again, even though I understand those who refuse to take them, I have a marriage license, a driver’s license, a CCW permit, and a Social Security card. There are many issues over which I am willing to be annoyed, but for the sake of perceived Christian testimony and/or perceived good citizenship, I reluctantly and grudgingly comply. But on the issue of taking away my right to keep and bear arms--including a semi-automatic rifle--I absolutely refuse to comply!

My line in the sand is drawn here!

Make no mistake about it: it is not just semi-automatic rifles that these gun grabbers are after. Ultimately, they want to take all of our guns. We either stop them now or there will be no stopping them at all.It is no hyperbole to say that this attempt by people such as Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein to make outlaws out of law-abiding citizens for simply exercising our right to keep and bear arms is the most important political battle of our lifetimes! I am not exaggerating when I say that the future of freedom and liberty for our children and for our country--not to mention the future of our own personal lives and freedom--hang in the balance.

• If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

And please visit my web site for past columns and much more.

© 2013 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Contact your elected representatives in the House and the Senate…   http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

IF YOU DO NOTHING, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM

ELECTION FRAUD

The North American Law Center is still looking into election fraud in the presidential election. 

 

By jbwilliams on Jan 2, 2013 

Despite a deafening silence on the part of the government controlled news media, it is no secret that very serious questions concerning Barack Obama’s history persist and that wide-spread election fraud was used by the Democratic Party and the Obama Campaign to secure a second Obama-Biden term.

At least one group seems interested in getting answers to those questions and stopping congress from certifying the 2012 election results until the American people have those answers.

The newly formed North American Law Center is serving members of the US Congress with a notice, demanding that congress stop the fraudulent 2012 election and advising members of congress not to become complicit in the fraud by certifying the tainted outcome of the 2012 election.

“BE ADVISED, your Oath of office requires you to act in a manner which upholds the United States Constitution, our State Constitutions, and the Rule of Law. This shall serve as Notice to you of the massive fraud which has occurred in the 2012 election. As a public servant, your highest duty is to the people of the United States. Failing to do your duty, after having been so noticed, will be a direct violation of your Oath, with malice aforethought.”

The notice lists a number of legally actionable items concerning Federal Election and Campaign Finance laws as well as Constitutional Eligibility violations that if proven, could entirely void the 2012 election and end with the criminal prosecution of those involved in carrying out and covering up that fraud.

“Prima facie evidence exists as to violations of Federal Election Commission law regulating campaign finance concerning overseas donations from foreign entities, into international money laundering and online credit and debit card fraud, using foreign contributions from stolen card numbers to finance a presidential campaign. Hundreds of millions of dollars pouring into the Obama campaign from overseas donors and all of it in untraceable small denominations.”

The notice lists evidence of blatant voter fraud in Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio, and a statement concerning general acts of fraud evidenced in numerous states and precincts.

“Many numerous methods of massive Democrat voter fraud exist, i.e. over 2 million new “temporary citizen” illegal alien voters via Executive Order; millions of DEAD and felon voters; temporarily moving Democrat voters across state lines to vote in swing states; foreign observers used to protect the fraudulent Democrat vote; duplicate voting by dual resident college students, and thousands of Somali refugee voters with DNC “interpreters” driving them to polls in Ohio; corrupted voting machines and vote counting with rigged voting machines via SEIU machine maintenance contracts; boxes of fraudulent paper ballots in the trunk of union official’s cars; and foreign contracts for vote counting in parts of Europe.”

Process servers are delivering the notice to all members of congress this week. Lead Counsel for the North American Law Center is Constitutional Attorney Stephen Pidgeon. Constitutional Law researcher and analyst Barbara Ketay chairs the organizations Government Corruption Committee and is the signer of the notice being delivered to members of congress.

The North American Law Center was formed by a group of citizens deeply concerned with government corruption and the ongoing erosion of state and individual constitutional rights. The organization is funded entirely by private citizens also deeply concerned with the matters of focus for the organization.

“For far too long, the American Justice System has subverted the Charters of Freedom and the Rule of Law in pursuit of a utopian global social justice at the expense of American freedom, liberty and prosperity.”

Many patriotic Americans are equally concerned about the items of interest to the North American Law Center, but this group is taking real and tangible actions that could alter the course of history and the future of freedom and liberty.

Citizens interested in more information or supporting this mission can visit www.NorthAmericanLawCenter.org

WILL MORE LAWS HELP?

In a perfect world, we could prevent all bad things from occurring by simply passing a law making it illegal.  In case you haven’t noticed, this is not a perfect world. 

Criminals and the mentally ill pay no attention to laws no matter how strict and explicit the laws may be.  Case in point: Adam Lanza broke the law 41 times as he carried out his deadly assault on an unsuspecting elementary school.  Just take a look:

Adam Lanza shot his mother, (#1), then stole three of her guns, (#2, #3, #4), then stole her truck, (#5), then illegally transported three weapons, (#6, #7, #8), then carried those weapons to the school without a carry permit, (#9, #10, #11), he broke into the school, (#12), brought those guns onto school property, (#13, #14, #15), then shot 26 more people (#16, #17, #18, #19, #20, #21, #22, #23, #24, #25, #26, #27, #28, #29, #30, #31, #32, #33, #34, #35, #36, #37, #38, #39, #40, #41).

The Democrat response - PASS ANOTHER LAW.   How brilliant is that?  Almost immediately Democrat Senator Feinstein was clear saying that Obama "is going to have a bill to lead on guns because the first day bill I’m going to introduce in the Senate, and the same bill will be introduced in the House; a bill to ban assault weapons."

It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation, and the possession, not retroactively, but prospectively," she said. "And it will ban the same for big clips of more than ten bullets.

"So there will be a bill," the Senator continued. "We've been working on it now for a year.   We've tried to take my bill from '94 to 2004 and perfect it.  We believe we have.  We exempt over 900 specific weapons that will not fall under the bill."  In violation of a recent Supreme Court Ruling.

"But the purpose of this bill," she said, "is to get (ALL) weapons of war off the streets of our cities."
Criminal activity is committed by definition by people breaking the law.  Therefore no amount of new laws will stop criminal activity.

The major reason Congress did not reauthorize the Assault Weapons Ban is because it proved to be useless and had no effect on illegal gun activity.  Criminals continued to commit illegal crimes.  But most compelling was the massive amount of data which proved that so called "Assault Weapons" were NOT connected to those crimes.  In fact, studies overwhelmingly prove that the owners of the weapons listed in Liberal "Assault Weapon Ban" attempts are owned by LAW ABIDING CITIZENS and are rarely if ever used in criminal activity.

Congress rightly realized that Liberals were not attempting to prevent crime; they were merely attempting to disarm law abiding citizens.  And it is happening again.  Ultra-liberal gun haters like Senator Diane Feinstein are using the Connecticut tragedy to support their bogus arguments for gun control.  Ironically, almost all of these “gun hating liberals” either carry a gun, or have an armed body guard.  And when they gun control, what they really mean NO GUNS FOR ANYONE BUT THE GOVERNMENT ELITE.  It’s perfectly acceptable if the rest of us are left helpless to defend ourselves and our family. 

Perhaps these liberal bureaucrats fear guns because of something George Washington said. 

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
– George Washington

Here’s something I didn’t know. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/03/FBI-More-People-Killed-With-Hammers-and-Clubs-Each-Year-Than-With-Rifles?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BigGovernment+%28Big+Government%29

The rest of the story

The interesting story of Gary Kleck, Criminologist

Born in Lombard, Ill., in 1951, Kleck received his B.A. from the University of Illinois in 1973. By 1979, he had received his Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Illinois in Urbana.  He has spent his entire career at Florida State University’s School of Criminology, beginning as an instructor and eventually becoming a professor at the College of Criminology and Criminal Justice in 1991.

It was also in 1991 that Kleck authored his first book, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America.  He would win the American Society of Criminology’s Michael J. Hindelang award in 1993 for the book.  In 1997, he authored Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control.  The same year, he joined Don B. Kates to publish The Great American Gun Debate: Essays on Firearms and Violence. In 2001, Kleck and Kates teamed up again for Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control.

Kleck’s first submission to a peer-reviewed journal on the subject of gun control was in 1979, when he penned an article on capital punishment, gun ownership and homicide for the American Journal of Sociology.  Since then, he has written more than 24 articles for various journals of sociology, criminology and others on the subject of guns and gun control.  He has also published countless newspaper articles and position papers over the course of his career.

What is striking is that Prof. Kleck actually began this series of studies to "prove" that guns in the hands of citizens doesn't reduce crime.  In his 1997 book, Targeting Guns, Kleck revealed that he is a member of several liberal organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International, and Democrats 2000.  He is registered as an active Democrat and has contributed financially to the campaigns of Democrat political candidates and supports the typical liberal agendas.  He is not a member of the National Rifle Association, or any other pro-gun organization.

When he finished crunching the data he found results that shocked him.  At a minimum, Americans use firearms 2.5 million times per year in direct, face to face defenses.  And that is Kleck's admittedly conservative estimate.  Additionally, only 1% of the time is the thug shot, and only 0.1% of all encountered thugs are killed.  Remarkable restraint, I'd say.  

The bad news, Kleck received far fewer invitations to Florida State University cocktail parties. The good news, He won the Hindelang Award for the most significant work by a criminologist (in a whole bunch of years).

Kleck’s 1993 study on guns and their use in self-defense proved to be one of the most damaging arguments against restricted gun rights as the gun control movement reached its peak in American politics.

Kleck’s Survey Findings
Kleck surveyed 2,000 households across the nation.  He then extrapolated the data to reach his findings.  In the process, he managed to shatter many previous survey claims and found that guns are used far more often for self-defense than they are used to commit crimes.
Among Kleck’s findings:

• For every use of a gun to commit a crime, there are three-to-four cases of guns being used in self-defense of a crime.
• Assault and robbery rates are lower when victims are armed with a gun.
• A gun is used in self-defense to protect its owner from crime 2.5 million times per year, an average of once every 13 seconds.
• Fifteen percent of the gun defenders interviewed believed someone would have died if they had not been armed. If true, that’s an average of one life saved due to firearm self-defense every 1.3 minutes.
• In nearly 75% of the cases, the victim did not know his attackers. In nearly 50% of the cases, he faced at least two attackers and in nearly 25% of the cases, there were three or more attackers. A quarter of the incidents of self-defense occurred away from the home.

Results of Kleck’s Findings
Kleck’s National Self-Defense Survey findings provided a strong argument for concealed carry laws and keeping guns in the home for self-defense purposes.  It also provided a counter argument to other surveys at the time which claimed that keeping guns for the purpose of self-defense was inadvisable due to their overall danger to the gun owner and his family members.

Marvin Wolfgang, a noted criminologist who was on record favoring a ban on all firearms, even those carried by law enforcement officers, was quoted as saying that the Kleck survey was nearly foolproof, saying: “What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz.  The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator…I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology.”

So, to quote Paul Harvey “Now you know the rest of the story”.

SOURCES:  

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/profiles/a/Gary-Kleck-Biography.htm

http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/Bayne/Firearms_and_Self-Defense.shtml

http://oklahomaconcealedcarry.com/Why_Get_a_Permit.html

http://www.largo.org/effects.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptCtNW5yI7c

 

UNBELIEVEABLE...Please read

A Letter from Hobby Lobby Stores CEO
By David Green, the founder and CEO of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

When my family and I started our company 40 years ago, we were working out of a garage on a $600 bank loan, assembling miniature picture frames. Our first retail store wasn't much bigger than most people's living rooms, but we had faith that we would succeed if we lived and worked according to God's word. From there, Hobby Lobby has become one of the nation's largest arts and crafts retailers, with more than 500 locations in 41 states. Our children grew up into fine business leaders, and today we run Hobby Lobby together, as a family.

We're Christians, and we run our business on Christian principles. I've always said that the first two goals of our business are (1) to run our business in harmony with God's laws, and (2) to focus on people more than money. And that's what we've tried to do. We close early so our employees can see their families at night. We keep our stores closed on Sundays, one of the week's biggest shopping days, so that our workers and their families can enjoy a day of rest. We believe that it is by God's grace that Hobby Lobby has endured, and he has blessed us and our employees. We've not only added jobs in a weak economy, we've raised wages for the past four years in a row. Our full-time employees start at 80% above minimum wage.

But now, our government threatens to change all of that. A new government health care mandate says that our family business MUST provide what I believe are abortion-causing drugs as part of our health insurance. Being Christians, we don't pay for drugs that might cause abortions, which means that we don't cover emergency contraception, the morning-after pill or the week-after pill. We believe doing so might end a life after the moment of conception, something that is contrary to our most important beliefs. It goes against the Biblical principles on which we have run this company since day one. If we refuse to comply, we could face $1.3 million PER DAY in government fines.

Our government threatens to fine job creators in a bad economy. Our government threatens to fine a company that's raised wages four years running. Our government threatens to fine a family for running its business according to its beliefs. It's not right. I know people will say we ought to follow the rules; that it's the same for everybody. But that's not true. The government has exempted thousands of companies from this mandate, for reasons of convenience or cost. But it won't exempt them for reasons of religious belief.

So, Hobby Lobby and my family are forced to make a choice. With great reluctance, we filed a lawsuit today, represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, asking a federal court to stop this mandate before it hurts our business. We don't like to go running into court, but we no longer have a choice. We believe people are more important than the bottom line and that honoring God is more important than turning a profit.

My family has lived the American dream. We want to continue growing our company and providing great jobs for thousands of employees, but the government is going to make that much more difficult. The government is forcing us to choose between following our faith and following the law. I say that's a choice no American and no American business should have to make. The government cannot force you to follow laws that go against your fundamental religious belief. They have exempted thousands of companies but will not except Christian organizations including the Catholic church.

Since you will not see this covered in any of the liberal media, pass this on to all your contacts.

Sincerely,
David Green, CEO and Founder of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

NEVER GIVE UP YOUR GUNS... NEVER

All Americans should read this...

Here is an article from one of the leading Russian Newspapers. (Pravda)

 

Americans never give up your guns

28.12.2012

By Stanislav Mishin

These days, there are few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bare arms and use deadly force to defend one's self and possessions.

This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.

Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington's clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lieing guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere....but criminals are still armed and still murdering and to often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or "talking to them", it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

Stanislav Mishin
The article reprinted with the kind permission from the author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina

Дмитрий Судаков

Copyright © 1999-2013, «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors.   http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-12-2012/123335-americans_guns-0/

Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

BELLEVUE, WA – President Obama was absolutely correct when he told NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday that “there will be resistance” to his extremist proposal to ban the most commonly-owned and popular rifles in America, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

“We will be on the front lines of that resistance,” vowed CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb.

The president gave an exclusive interview to “Meet the Press” during which he said that he will put his “full weight” behind the gun ban effort, and that he would like to accomplish this ban during the first year of his second term, meaning sometime in 2013. Mr. Obama also said he will “call all the stakeholders together.”

“We’re still waiting for his telephone call,” Gottlieb said.  “He has insisted that he will talk to anybody.  If the discussion is all about penalizing honest gun owners, banning guns and eroding the Second Amendment, it’s going to be an awfully short conversation.”

Fears of a looming gun ban have caused sales of modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines to skyrocket.

“The guns that President Obama and Capitol Hill gun grabbers don’t want the people to have,” Gottlieb observed, “are the ones people are buying by the bushel.  Criminals won’t turn them in, so why should law-abiding gun owners be expected to do that?

“Mr. Obama admitted that he has historically supported banning semi-autos and magazines,” he noted.  “His philosophy is to focus on an object when we should focus on perpetrators and the horrible pattern of violence that has resulted from the creation of so-called ‘gun-free’ zones.
 Gun-free zones and gun bans only disarm victims and create risk-free conditions for criminals and crazies.

“You cannot have an honest discussion about violence without addressing conditions that make it easy for criminals,” Gottlieb concluded.  “You can’t keep people truly safe by giving them the illusion of safety. You do not stop criminals by penalizing law-abiding citizens and demonizing their firearms.”