NEVER TOLERATE TYRANNY!....Conservative voices from the GRASSROOTS.
This is How the DHS Seizes Your Guns
Posted on February 13, 2013 by Robert Farago
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently raided one of our readers: a kitchen table FFL dealer who does everything—everything—by the book. He has, however, consistently criticized the ATF for its unconstitutional regulations and long history of extra-legal activities. This is his story. Update to follow, after he consults with his lawyer . . .
First of all, forget about them coming to the door. They’ll intercept you on your way home from the Doctor’s office (for example), then one vehicle will come up behind you and two will block your way in front and turn on the flashing lights. They then jump out with ‘real’ assault rifles, point them at you and order your hands up, and exit the vehicle. You, being a law abiding citizen, comply. At gunpoint, they order you to assume the position against your car, handcuffs you and frisk you, and you’re directed to get into the back seat. Then the lead agent gets into the driver seat and drives your car to your driveway. You sit there with cuffed hands behind you – bleeding.
As multiple vehicles close off the street and announce over a loudspeaker for all your neighbors to remain indoors (and are prohibited from leaving), the lead agent calls your house and directs your wife to come out of the house – and sit in the front seat. She does. Then the Homeland Security Special Tactical Unit, and the county sheriff Swat Team arrive, and drive two armored cars over the curb onto the lawn, as the “Jack Booted Thugs” with machine guns, helmets, boots, camo, etc. enter and search your house.
You see a Homeland Security Helocopter circling overhead. You are asked if you have any explosives (well, several cans of black powder….) and are there any booby traps in the house. They offer to let you read the search warrant, but your hands are cuffed behind your back. The agent in your car reads it very quickly.
After the Jack Booted Thugs are through, teams arrive to search and ransack the house. After about an hour, you are released and NO CHARGES are filed. You are required to stay beyond the perimeter as they set up tables in your yard and begin to paw through and process your worldly possessions.
You finally realize that they’re going to keep an eye on you, but you go to a neighbor to make phone calls – and find a good lawyer, who arrives on site, but is kept out by the agents. The agents search one of your cars and release it to you. Hours later, knowing there is nothing you can do on site, you leave and arrange a motel for the night.
Later, about 9PM (12 hours later), you phone your house and an agent answers, then advises you they’re about to leave. You drive to your house to see four Feds in your front yard, ready to leave. They tell you they don’t know where the house key is (which you gave them), nor where your cat is. They hand you a copy of the search warrant, but fail to provide a copy of the inventory (which they give you two days later).
You examine your house. Your computers are gone along with every extra & old hard drive, all data cds, floppies, thumb drives, compact flash drives, and other SD drives for your camera. But most shocking, is that your entire gun collection, which you spent a lifetime building, is gone.
Antique guns, airguns, non-guns. Virtually everything. One antique shotgun lies broken on the floor. Papers are strewn everywhere. Once they looked at it, and didn’t want it, they just tossed it aside. Piles of paper. The house is trashed – every room. Your clothing has been ransacked. Your wife’s clothing and underwear. You don’t even know what is missing. You look around, feel sick, lock up the house and go to the motel.
You return the next day to try to start to get things back in order, but realize it will take weeks.
Later, you find out that the affidavit which justified the search warrant is sealed – and you can’t even find out why they searched and seized. A few days later, the sworn affidavit is unsealed, and you find out that the agent lied repeatedly, told half-truths, speculated about possible violations, and related his ‘suspicions’ with no basis in fact – and that the search warrant is nothing more than a gigantic fishing expedition to see what they could find . . .
You may also like -
Views: 143
Comment
-
Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on February 19, 2013 at 8:41pm
-
19 Feb 2013
Photo Credit: Getty Images
According to a short video produced by the NRA, a Justice Department memo says that an assault weapon ban would not be effective without mandatory gun confiscation and that universal background checks would only work with federal gun registration, Jim Hoft reported at the Gateway Pundit on Monday, citing a blog post at Guns Saves Lives.
“Make no mistake,” the blog post said, “an assault weapons ban of any kind, even with a grandfathering clause is a step towards gun confiscation.”
The post also says that universal background checks are “just the first step” in implementing federal gun registration, which will ultimately lead to confiscation.
Democrats in at least two states — Missouri and Minnesota — have already proposed legislation that if passed into law, would require law-abiding gun owners to surrender rifles, shotguns and pistols deemed to be “assault weapons.” A proposal being considered in Washington State would require local sheriffs to inspect the homes of those with “assault weapons” to ensure they are secure.
Advocates of gun control say they do not want to take guns away from hunters and sport shooters, but another post at Guns Save Lives provides quotes from prominent Democrats advocating confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.
-
-
N.Y. bill would force gun owners to buy at least $1M in insurance
The Washington Times, Tuesday, February 19, 2013
A bill introduced in the New York State Assembly by Assemblyman Felix Ortiz, a Democrat, would require the state’s residents to acquire liability insurance as a condition for gun ownership.
“Any person in this state who shall own a firearm shall, prior to such ownership, obtain and continuously maintain a policy of liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars specifically covering any damages resulting from any negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person,” the measure, dubbed S2353, reads.
SEE RELATED: Mayor Emanuel: Minority males are majority of Chicago’...
Any person who has not purchased insurance in compliance with the law within 30 days of its passing would be in violation of the law.
Such an occurrence “shall result in the immediate revocation of such owner’s registration, license and any other privilege to own such firearm.”
The bill also states that if a gun is stolen, the legal owner of that gun is responsible for any damage incurred until a loss or theft is reported to the police department.
Liability insurance for $1 million in coverage for gun owners is estimated to cost between $1,600 and $2,000 annually, the Examiner reports.
The bill has been referred to the Assembly’s Insurance Committee.
Mr. Ortiz represents a district in the New York borough of Brooklyn.
SPECIAL COVERAGE: Second Amendment and Gun Control
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC.
-
-
Left Needs a Lesson in Realities of Gun Use
Written on Tuesday, February 19, 2013 by Tad Cronn
Amid the push to further restrict guns, liberals have seldom stopped to investigate the facts of gun crimes or the practical effects of the laws they propose to chip away at Second Amendment-protected rights.
One study that gun grabbers should take a hard look at was issued in January, after the Newtown shootings, by the National Institute of Justice, the research wing of the Department of Justice. The report argues that so-called “assault weapons” are not a major contributor to crime and laws restricting them will not have a substantial impact on gun-related deaths.
The study points out that the types of guns erroneously called “assault weapons” in most legislation are widely owned because of their usefulness for hunting, target shooting and defense.
They also are rarely used in crimes, the study finds. Further, the sort of mass shootings that draw all the media attention only account for on average 35 firearm deaths per year.
The NIJ study also calls into question the effectiveness of gun buybacks, finding that most of the guns turned in were unlikely to be used in crimes in the first place, and purchasing of new guns often occurs with the cash provided to participants.
Another favorite tactic of gun grabbers, limiting the bullet capacity of magazines, is also ineffective because ammo magazines are durable goods and are widely owned.
Like guns themselves, the report can be used for good or ill, unfortunately. A close reading of many of the findings shows that typical gun law bans are ineffective because they don’t affect existing guns and magazines.
Read closely, the study might make the case for forced confiscations in the minds of liberals.
The gun grabbers don’t need any more encouragement to imitate their heroes, such as Chairman Mao. In Washington state, a bill was introduced recently to the Senate that would ban sale of semiautomatic guns with detachable magazines. Regarding existing guns that were legally owned before the law might go into effect, however, the bill authorizes warantless searches of gun owners’ homes.
“In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall … safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection,” the bill states.
The greatest fear of people who believe in defending their rights under the Second Amendment has always been that the government, either federal or state, would move to confiscate legally owned weapons in the name of “public safety.”
And every time gun control comes up, the liberals who are almost invariably the instigators, promise there will be no confiscation. Supporters of the Washington bill say the home-search provision was a “mistake.”
But bills like that in Washington, along with unexplained facts like the Department of Homeland Security stocking up on enough ammunition to fight an Iraq-scale war for 30 years, don’t exactly make citizens want to trust in the government’s good intentions.
With President Obama’s re-election, we seem to have reached a turning point. Liberals have always tried to chip away at people’s rights.
But the hubris flying around Washington, D.C., and liberal-dominated state capitols across the country seems to have brought things to a place where the Left no longer feels compelled to hide its intentions and barely feels compelled to explain them.
And that place is the one the Founding Fathers had in mind when they drafted the Second Amendment.
http://patriotupdate.com/articles/left-needs-a-lesson-in-realities-...
-
-
More States Tell Federal Gov: Don't Touch Our Guns
-
-
Chicago Police Chief: 2nd Amendment Danger to Public Safety…
(Red State) – Chicago’s Chief of Police, who previously blamed ”government-sponsored racism” and Sarah Palin for Chicago’s gun violence, declared that the law-ful exercise of the Second Amendment was a threat to public safety. From the Illinois State Rifle Association:
SPECIAL: Join TeaParty.org to Fund “Youth Firearms Training Initiative”
Chicago’s embattled police superintendent dug himself deeper into a pit of controversy today by claiming that lawful firearm owners are agents of political corruption. Appearing on a Chicago Sunday morning talk show, superintendent Garry McCarthy expressed his conviction that firearm owners who lobby their elected representatives or who donate money to political campaigns are engaged in corruption that endangers public safety. McCarthy went on to express his belief that judges and legislators should rely on public opinion polls when interpreting our Constitution.
After totally dismissing the citizen’s right to redress grievances, McCarthy trained his constitutional wisdom on the 2nd Amendment. Despite recent court decisions to the contrary, McCarthy opined that the 2ndAmendment limits citizens to owning smooth-bore muskets. McCarthy went on to say that he believes that the 2nd Amendment supports mandatory liability insurance for firearm owners and the mandatory application of GPS tracking devices to civilian owned firearms.
“ Garry McCarthy ’s understanding of our Constitution barely qualifies him as a meter maid, never mind the chief of the nation’s third largest police department,” commented ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson . “What on earth would possess McCarthy to assert that constitutional rights should be meted out based on public opinion polls? Let’s not forget that public opinion polls once opposed a woman’s right to vote while it would be a safe bet that, at one time, polls would have shown lynching as an acceptable form of justice. It has been said that our Constitution exists to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. McCarthy’s view of our Constitution is dangerous and unbecoming of a civil servant.”
“McCarthy needs to understand that the lawful firearm owners of this state will continue to lobby their representatives and continue to support candidates who represent their interests,” continued Pearson. “If Garry McCarthy doesn’t like that, well that’s just too bad. If McCarthy is so interested in influence peddling, he should pop into some of the gin mills ringing the Illinois Capitol and count the ruddy red noses of taxpayer-funded lobbyists for the City of Chicago.”
McCarthy’s assertion that the Founders limited arms to smooth bore muskets is demonstrably false as well.
McCarthy has previously said that Illinois “does not have strict gun laws” and that stricter laws were needed in order to adequately combat crimes committed by those illegally possessing firearms.
It’s a concerning prejudice against law-abiding citizens from an official who has the authority to arrest and give orders to fire at them.
http://www.redstate.com/dloesch/2013/02/17/chicago-police-chief-sec...
-
-
Mexico to Ask US Senate to Create Gun Registry in Border States
http://www.insightcrime.org/news-briefs/mexico-to-ask-us-senate-to-...
Mexico's Congress voted to formally ask the United States Senate to create a registry of all commercialized firearms in the states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. Although the motion will have little impact in the US, it shows the gun control issue continues to resonate on both sides of the border.
The measure was approved January 9 by Mexico's Permanent Commission, the government body that meets when the Senate and the lower house of Congress, the Chamber of Deputies, is in recess.
The Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) senator who introduced the proposal said it was intended to make it easier to trace guns used in violent attacks, reports Mexican newspaper Informador. Close to 60,000 people were killed during the six-year presidency of Felipe Calderon, who left office in December.
The US Southwest is a significant source of weaponry for Mexico's criminal organizations, who typically purchase firearms from US gun stores via a middleman or "straw buyer."
In one indication of the reach of these arms trafficking networks, a semi-automatic pistol recently found at the scene of one shootout in Mexico has been traced back to a former Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agent, as Minneapolis newspaper the Star Tribune reports. The semi-automatic was found at the scene of the shootout that killed a Mexican beauty queen.
The gun was traced back to an ATF agent who worked in Arizona and played a prominent role in the so-called "Fast and Furious" scandal, which charged the ATF had willingly allowed weapons to "walk" across the border in an attempt to prosecute the main purchasers of the guns in Mexico. The scheme failed to reach the high level targets, and some of the weapons were later used in attacks on US law enforcement prompting a congressional investigation and hearings. The ATF agent apparently sold the weapon online for $1,100 to a US citizen in Arizona.
InSight Crime Analysis
The vote will likely prove to be a symbolic one. Gun laws in the US Southwest vary, with stricter controls enforced in California, compared to Arizona and Texas. It is unlikely that the US Senate will begin to pressure these areas to enforce more stringent controls anytime soon, although President Barack Obama has said that he is contemplating presidential decrees that would make it more difficult to obtain assault weapons nationwide. This threat follows the shooting deaths of 27 people, most of them children, in a Newtown, Connecticut school.
The US is not the only illicit source of weaponry in Mexico. Guns stolen or illegally sold by the Mexican military, the owner of the only legal gun store in the country, are also thought to provide criminal groups with firepower. Some soldiers and police in Central America also illegally supply weapons to organized criminal groups throughout the region.
Still, the US is by far the largest supplier of weapons to Mexican criminal organizations, according to numerous ATF agents interviewed by InSight Crime.
-
-
Misstep in gun bill could defeat the effort
Seattle Times staff columnist
Originally published February 16, 2013 at 6:22 PM
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020373291_westneat17xml.htm...
One of the major gun-control efforts in Olympia this session calls for the sheriff to inspect the homes of assault-weapon owners. The bill’s backers say that was a mistake.
Forget police drones flying over your house. How about police coming inside, once a year, to have a look around?
As Orwellian as that sounds, it isn’t hypothetical. The notion of police home inspections was introduced in a bill last week in Olympia.
That it’s part of one of the major gun-control efforts pains me. It seemed in recent weeks lawmakers might be headed toward some common-sense regulation of gun sales. But then last week they went too far. By mistake, they claim. But still too far.
“They always say, we’ll never go house to house to take your guns away. But then you see this, and you have to wonder.”
That’s no gun-rights absolutist talking, but Lance Palmer, a Seattle trial lawyer and self-described liberal who brought the troubling Senate Bill 5737 to my attention. It’s the long-awaited assault-weapons ban, introduced last week by three Seattle Democrats.
Responding to the Newtown school massacre, the bill would ban the sale of semi-automatic weapons that use detachable ammunition magazines. Clips that contain more than 10 rounds would be illegal.
But then, with respect to the thousands of weapons like that already owned by Washington residents, the bill says this:
“In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall ... safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.”
In other words, come into homes without a warrant to poke around. Failure to comply could get you up to a year in jail.
“I’m a liberal Democrat — I’ve voted for only one Republican in my life,” Palmer told me. “But now I understand why my right-wing opponents worry about having to fight a government takeover.”
He added: “It’s exactly this sort of thing that drives people into the arms of the NRA.”
I have been blasting the NRA for its paranoia in the gun-control debate. But Palmer is right — you can’t fully blame them, when cops going door-to-door shows up in legislation.
I spoke to two of the sponsors. One, Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, a lawyer who typically is hyper-attuned to civil-liberties issues, said he did not know the bill authorized police searches because he had not read it closely before signing on.
“I made a mistake,” Kline said. “I frankly should have vetted this more closely.”
That lawmakers sponsor bills they haven’t read is common. Still, it’s disappointing on one of this political magnitude. Not counting a long table, it’s only an eight-page bill.
The prime sponsor, Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, also condemned the search provision in his own bill, after I asked him about it. He said Palmer is right that it’s probably unconstitutional.
“I have to admit that shouldn’t be in there,” Murray said.
He said he came to realize that an assault-weapons ban has little chance of passing this year anyway. So he put in this bill more as “a general statement, as a guiding light of where we need to go.” Without sweating all the details.
Later, a Senate Democratic spokesman blamed unnamed staff and said a new bill will be introduced.
Murray had alluded at a gun-control rally in January that progress on guns could take years.
“We will only win if we reach out and continue to change the hearts and minds of Washingtonians,” Murray said. “We can attack them, or start a dialogue.”
Good plan, very bad start. What’s worse, the case for the perfectly reasonable gun-control bills in Olympia just got tougher.
Danny Westneat’s column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com
BOOK STORE
.
SUPPORT
REAL CONSERVATIVES
Order our book!
$ 9.95
INSTANT DOWNLOAD
TO ORDER
CLICK HERE:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/raymond-athens/right-side-up/ebook/product-17358205.html
TO ORDER
CLICK HERE:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/raymond-athens/right-side-up/ebook/product-17358205.html
The book RIGHT SIDE UP is a compilation of choice content from this web site...reflecting sometimes forgotten, purely Traditional American Values...
*********************
The Unborn
...let them BE !
TO ORDER
CLICK HERE:
http://tpartyus2010.ning.com/forum/topics/save-a-life-and-maybe-a-soul
*****************
.
.
RICHARD
ALLAN
JENNI'S
THE
DANNY MALONE TRILOGY
CLICK HERE:
http://www.amazon.com/Danny-Malone-Trilogy-Mohammeds-Daughter/dp/1432724932
"The Fox, Golden Gate and Mohammed's Daughter"
Paperback
*************************
© 2024 Created by Your Uncle Sam.
Powered by
You need to be a member of REAL CONSERVATIVES to add comments!
Join REAL CONSERVATIVES