Sunday, July 17, 2016

Freedom Threatened By Gun Control!


Congressional Staffers Refuse To Put Gun-Free Zone Signs On Their Property   
Published on Jul 12, 2016
In this new video, Project Veritas set its sights on top gun control advocates in Congress to see how they felt when placed in the same position as those who fall victim within Gun Free Zones. The people who died in the Orlando Pulse terror attack died within a gun free zone. Project Veritas put that same concept to the test with some of America’s most fervent advocates for gun control. Posing as “Citizens Against Senseless Violence,” Project Veritas citizen journalists went door-to-door in New York and Washington, D.C. to see which outspoken champions for Gun Control would be willing to declare their own home as a “Gun Free Zone” by placing a sign on their lawn.
It’s Not About Assault Rifles, It’s About Defending Freedom
By Ron Ewart
July 13, 2016
In our recent article entitled, “What Was That 4th of July Freedom Again?” we described what happened to freedom since Patrick Henry uttered those immoral words, “Give Me Liberty, Or Give Me Death.” We laid out the details on the slow erosion of our freedoms. Oh yes, Americans have more liberties than the people in most countries, but is that the standard we are willing to accept? How much more degradation of our freedom will Americans tolerate? Will they suddenly find themselves in chains not knowing how they got there?
The enumerated powers of the Federal Government were described in the U. S. Constitution in Article I, Section 8, Clause’s 1 through 18. In point of fact there were only 17 powers, the 18th being an implementing power to the first 17. Allegedly, all other rights belonged to the states and the people, but do they?
The 10th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Today, what powers and what rights do the states and the people still retain? The Federal Government has greatly expanded the original 17 limited powers and in so doing has seriously diluted and degraded the powers of the states and the people. By bastardizing and twisting the “Commerce” and “Necessary and Proper” Clauses and supported by flawed decisions by the U. S. Supreme Court, they have blatantly usurped the sovereign powers and rights of the people. By virtue of this expansion of power, the Federal Government has become the Master of the people, one of the greatest fears expressed by many of the Founding Fathers in setting up a central government.
So lets take this expansion of powers by the Federal Government to its logical conclusion ….. “absolute power.” Absolute power is absolute tyranny. How far is America from absolute power by the Federal Government ….. a fortnight, a month, a year, a decade, a generation, a century? That depends on the people and how willing they are to defend freedom.
Local, state and federal government politicians mistakenly believe, at their own peril, that if they pass law after law against the citizens of America, especially if those laws fall outside of the expected freedoms most Americans believe are their unalienable rights, they are somehow immune from some of those Americans striking back with violence. First, it will be isolated incidents like the man near Denver, mad at local authorities over zoning issues, outfitted his large bulldozer with steel plates and small holes to see through, brought it to the planning department's office and leveled the building before he committed suicide.
Then there is the case of a man somewhere in Arizona that couldn't trim his own hedges himself and had to have it done by the contracted landscaper of the gated community he lived in, at his cost of course. He sued the community and lost. His next action was violence. He took a shotgun to the community meeting and killed two of the commissioners. He will be in jail for the rest of his life.
A disgruntled contractor in Kirkwood, MO, just south of St. Louis, with a history of acrimony against civic leaders, stormed City Hall during a council meeting, yelled "Shoot the mayor!" and opened fire, killing two police officers and three city officials before law enforcers fatally shot him. It seems that the man was frequently at odds with the zoning commission. He ran a contracting business from his home and was often cited for storing materials that didn’t meet code.
Does any of this sound familiar? It especially does to the American rural landowner who is assaulted every day by growing land use and environmental regulations.
As law after law is added to the already voluminous law books, law breaking will become the norm and the incidents we cited above will increase. Violence will follow the law breaking as government exerts more police power to enforce the growing number of insane and unenforceable laws. As government tyranny and enforcement rises and politicians and bureaucrats, at every level of government, continue to squeeze Americans with new and more draconian laws, violence will be the final arbiter, unless WE THE PEOPLE rise up en masse and peaceably take control of our government and bring it back to the principles of constitutional law that the Founding Fathers created for us, at great cost.
What we have now is a government run amok by special interests and politicians only too eager to pander to those special interests for the money and political influence they will need to win the next election. On the other side we have an electorate that is oblivious to the corruption that goes on at every level of government and doesn't seem to care one whit. They don't care at their own peril.
Nevertheless, having said this in the context of the Second Amendment, let us be clear:
“Under almost every circumstance we do not condone violence in any form.”
But some citizens, who are frustrated with the unreasonable and in some cases treasonable actions of government, will resort to violence to relieve their pent up anger and frustration. No matter how much the politicians shield themselves with a huge police presence at government meetings and conferences, or when they are alone out in the community, some Americans will resort to violence against those they think are responsible for their grief and frustration and will find a way to deliver that violence.
Being a politician will eventually become extremely hazardous, unless politicians wise up and return to the principles of freedom and liberty laid down for us and paid for by the blood of countless brave men and women that have gone before us. If you squeeze a ripe tomato too hard, it will ooze out between your fingers. If you squeeze Americans too hard, unintended and sometimes violent consequences will be the result. It is an inescapable fact, which way too many ignore.
So what is the solution to the evolution of government absolute power and absolute tyranny? The Founders gave us that solution in the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment was not about hunting, or defending yourself against criminals, although worthwhile elements. The Second Amendment was about defending yourself and your loved ones against absolute government power and absolute government tyranny.
During the American Revolution, both sides had roughly the same weapons; swords, muskets, pistols, gunpowder and cannons. But today both sides do not have the same weapons. The government has the weapons that could easily annihilate the entire population of America and the power to totally enslave anyone that survives.
The imbalance in weapons and power between the government and the people is the difference between a cannon ball and a grain of sand. If the Second Amendment is to remain relevant in today’s world of super weapons, the people must be able to arm themselves to the point of at least giving them an edge, albeit a slight one. That edge is the assault rifle. If every American household had an assault weapon on the premises and was trained to use it, there would be a lot less crime and government wouldn’t be so quick to continue degrading our liberties by passing zillions of unconstitutional laws and turning America into a police state.
The question as to how much of an edge the people should have against government tyranny has raged for many decades. Should the people have hand grenades, bazookas, mortars, tanks, aircraft and other heavy weapons? The general consensus is that in an ordered and peaceful society such weapons in the hands of the general population would pose a serious risk to others in the population. That is a strong and logical argument.
So where does society draw the line and still be compatible with the roots of the Second Amendment? We have already seen that hand guns and rifles also pose a threat to the general population. Using that same argument, why then should people be allowed to own handguns and rifles? Again, using that argument, English and Australian governments outlawed the ownership of guns. Correspondingly, crime in both countries rose because the criminal, who is always able to obtain weapons on the black market, prey on a defenseless population. In contrast, the people of Switzerland are encouraged to own and train with guns. They don’t have a lot of crime in Switzerland.
Yes, in a free society, some deranged people or terrorists will take a handgun, a rifle, an assault weapon, or a bomb and turn it on other people, as happened in San Bernardino, Orlando, Aurora, Columbine, Sandy Hook and now Dallas. In each case an armed man or woman could have dispatched the shooter, with a lot less loss of life. But in all those cases we cite, only in Dallas did the victims of the shooter (the police) have guns.
Unfortunately, the news and social media play the tragic events endlessly for days at a time, stirring up gullible people into believing that the only solution is to ban assault rifles, bullets, or even take all weapons away from the private citizen. Democrats are the champions of these efforts and make no mistake, if the Democrats had their way, they would ban the ownership of handguns, rifles and assault weapons and even bullets, as did the liberals in England and Australia. On America’s present course, the Democrats could very well be successful in that goal.
But every time the Democrats call for more gun control in America, gun sales rise dramatically, virtually overnight. There are now more guns in America than there are people. One in three Americans own one or more guns. Since Obama took office in 2009, just to meet the growing demand, gun manufacturing rose from 5.5 million guns in 2009, to over 11 million guns in 2013 and gun manufacturing and gun sales are still on the rise in 2016. (Source: NPR)
Two people we know stated emphatically to us, they don’t know why anyone should own an assault weapon, the argument being you don’t need an assault weapon to go hunting. They ignore the fundamental purpose of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment was never about types of weapons, or hunting, or even your personal safety. It was and is about defending freedom. It’s about holding government in check. It’s about stopping government tyranny. It’s about not allowing government to evolve into absolute power.
A Japanese admiral was purported to have said during World War II why he wouldn’t invade America. He said, “because there would be a gun behind every tree.” The admiral was right then and he is right today. In Wisconsin alone, there are over 600,000 people with hunting permits. It is easy to assume that a large portion of that 600,000 own guns. That’s just one state.
An armed society, whether handguns, rifles, or assault weapons, is a significant and necessary deterrent against government tyranny and absolute power. The question is, when do the people invoke the Second Amendment to derail a government bent on absolute power? If the American government, at all levels, continues this vicious and relentless assault on the American people and their liberties, on the guise of social justice, radical environmentalism, multi-culturalism, political correctness and the one-world-order, that question may be answered sooner than any of us think.
For those interested in all types of weapons and weapon manuals, we have a weapons page on the NARLO website HERE. And, if you want to defend yourself against government without resorting to violence, we have developed four (4) effective defenses HERE.
[NOTE: The opinion in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the opinion of, it's employees, representatives, or other contributing writers.]
© 2016 Ron Ewart — All Rights Reserved
Ron Ewart, a nationally known author and speaker on freedom and property issues and author of his weekly column, "In Defense of Rural America", is the President of the National Association of Rural Landowners, (NARLO) ( a non-profit corporation headquartered in Washington State, an advocate and consultant for urban and rural landowners. He can be reached for comment at
Gun Control? Try Prescription Pill Control First
By Cheryl Chumley
July 2, 2016
There's a cycle in this country that goes like this: Shooting, call for gun control, Democratic rail against Republican refusal to pass senseless gun control, and brief lull and calm before the next shooting and gun control storm.
The latest in this scene, of course, played in Orlando. Barely had the dead and injured been carted from Pulse when President Obama was making his anti-Second Amendment case, pulling at liberal heartstrings while entering classic scold mode: "This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or in a house of worship, or a movie theater, or in a nightclub. And we have to decide if that's the kind of country we want to be. And to actively do nothing is a decision as well," he said.
But actively doing something that's useless is a decision, too – and one that seems more political back-patting than truly hellpful. Not to state the obvious, but once again, guns don't kill people. People carrying guns kill people. And denying the main reasons why people carrying guns kill people won't solve the killing problem.
Orlando's shootings seem based in radical Islamism. Obama doesn't like to admit that, so for a time, the nation has to suffer another round of Who-Dunnit, a game involving the White House, a complicit media and a grouping of equally dopey left-leaning bureaucrats who all join in the reindeer fun and act like passing gun control laws and censoring 9-1-1 emergency calls will stop the jihad. So it goes; the Team Obama version of the war on terror.
But deceptions run deeper when it comes to gun control. For instance: The anti-Second Amendment crowd may slide this under the radar, but according to Linda Lagemann, a former licensed clinical psychologist with 23 years of experience who presently serves as a commissioner with the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, dozens of recent cases of high-profile shooters have shared more than an affinity for guns – they've shared a pill-popping background that included the taking of psychotropic drugs, some at least which were medically and legally prescribed.
There was James Holmes, who was taking Zoloft as he murdered 12 and wounded 70 during an Aurora, Colorado, massacre in 2012, Lagemann said in an email. There was Ivan Lopez, the Army soldier who killed three and injured 16 at Fort Hood in 2014, all while taking prescribed doses of Ambien, the blog DC Clothesline reported.
Others are tracking the ties, as well. As CBS News reminded, there was Dylann Storm Roof, the 2015 South Carolina church shooter, found with the anti-pain Suboxone. As Western Journalism pointed, there was Elliot Rodger, the 2014 Isla Vista, California, college shooter on Xanax and Vicodin. And as the Washington Post reported, there was even Eric Harris, from way back in 1999, whose dead body after committing the Columbine High School shootings was found to contain the anti-depressant, anti-anxiety Luvox.
There are more – plenty more. So rather thhan using every instance of gun-related murders in this nation as a jumping point to push more gun control, wouldn't it seem worthwhile – after ruling outt radical Islamism, that is – to at least take a look at psychotropic prescriptions andd research whether they're precursors to violence? Even medical experts admit these drugs aren't always helpful.
In January, the Food and Drug Administration announced the approval of Adzenys XR-ODT, an amphetamine extended-release oral tablet to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in patients aged six or older. Part of its labeling, as described on RxList, warned of its potential to "exacerbate symptoms of behavior disturbance" in those with a "pre-existing psychotic disorder," as well as its chances to cause a "manic episode in patients with bipolar disorder." Worse, the label cautioned that even "at recommended doses, [the pill] may cause psychotic or manic symptoms," including "hallucinations, delusional thinking or mania in patients without prior history of psychotic illness or mania."
But guns are the problem? Seems like pill control might be the better argument.
© 2016 Cheryl Chumley - All Rights Reserved
Cheryl K. Chumley, a news writer with and former news staffer with the Washington Times, is also the author of "Police State USA: How Orwell's Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality." She may be reached on Twitter at @ckchumley, or through her blog,
Also See:
More About Gun Control!
05 January 2016
Guns? No Guns? What Think Ye?
09 December 2015
Why is America So Violent?
18 November 2013
Why is the Department of Homeland Security Stockpiling Ammo?
29 April 2013
Give Up Your Guns ... Or Else!
02 March 2013
What's Not Being Told About Newtown, Sandy Hook Elementary School?
(Part 1)
19 December 2012
(Part 2)
18 January 2013
(Part 3)
19 April 2013
Gun Control in America ... Really?
17 January 2013
Harper Scraps the Long-Gun Registry!
26 October 2011
Gun Control and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
16 January 2009