“Right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun,” Barack Obama told the country as he attempted to find a scapegoat for his Homeland Security Department totally blowing letting the “better half” of the San Bernardino terror tag team into the country. “That is insane.
“If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun,” Obama explained, continuing with misdirection about killer “motives” and setting the stage, naturally, for further infringements of the Second Amendment. “And so I’m calling on Congress to close this loophole, now.”
That “loophole” is a pesky thing called “due process,” and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty due every American. As for foreigners, if they’re too dangerous to let on a plane, what’s insane is allowing them to be here moving freely among us in the first place.
But, following “progressive” Opposite Day “logic,” if we assume Obama actually believes it, anyone who opposes him on this is insane. No problem, he’s got that group slated for a federal gun prohibition, too. And yes, of course without full legal protections for the accused equivalent to a jury trial.
So if he suspects you’re a terrorist, and no, he’s not going to tell you how and why, because that’s a secret, too bad.
Naturally, the “crusading watchdog media” is beside itself with tail-thumping ecstasy at the prospect of master being pleased. Veteran political blood dancers, like Connecticut Gov. Dannell Malloy, can’t wait to start in with dictated prohibitions and confiscations. Ditto for ambitious New York State Senator Jeff Klein (may we assume, as the failed Sheldon Silver defense maintained, that he, like all NY politicians, is corrupt?). Neither has seen fit to mention the overwhelming noncompliance with existing Intolerable Acts in their respective states, and how adding another unconstitutional edict that invites mass defiance will impact any but those inclined to obey out of fear.
Certainly real terrorists won’t skip a beat, and they’ll probably appreciate the heads-up that they’ve been made. And that brings us to just who the “terrorists” are, at least according to the indignant weasels who don’t like you owning guns.
If you listen to the hyperventilating libel at The New York Daily News, NRA’s Wayne LaPierre fits the bill. Lest you think that’s just idle hyperbole, do a Google search for keywords “NRA” and “terrorist.” Then note the influential “progressive” advocacy group, MoveOn.org, is hosting a “Declare the NRA a terrorist organization” petition, a sentiment echoed by The New York Daily News’ resident Stasi, the same sick harpy who equated a conservative San Bernardino murder victim with his Islamist executioners.
If they’re ready to call NRA members terrorists, can calling for the detention of gun rights advocates more hard core than Wayne LaPierre be far behind? That’s old news.
“These town hall terrorists could be declared enemy combatants and bundled off to Bagram with the stroke of a pen,” tyranny fanboy Ted Rall said of lawful open carriers. “If ever there was a reason for suspending civil rights, this is it.”
So then what of colleague Mike Vanderboegh, pegged an “extremist” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, as AP noted in a Friday report. What of me, his friend and associate? What of our hosts here at AmmoLand? What of you who read this site, agree with much of it and share its posts?
We are the people the totalitarian lobby is itching to disarm. And that’s why this latest bit of “official” domestic terrorism masked by the noble-sounding goal of keeping us all safe is so insidious, and has the potential to get extremely dangerous for everyone. Especially considering the confiscations being called for, and what that means to those who will not surrender their property or their rights to oath-breaking usurpers.
To quote poet Dylan Thomas, some of us will “not go gentle into that good night.” I’ve actually had repeating that line held against me before. But it’s true, particularly for original Second Amendment intent advocates smeared as “insurrectionists.”
As things stand, the immediate danger is being intensified by prominent Republicans siding with the concept of watchlist prohibitions, notably by some of the presidential candidates, including one who’s been forgiven for past betrayals and supported by the “terrorist” NRA. Barring unforeseen developments taking precedence, I expect to address that inexcusable sellout, along with a developing potential disappointment, in my next offering.
UPDATE: The follow-up article anticipated in the previous paragraph will still happen, but there’s no hurry and there are some other stories I want to get to first.
Read the Original Article at Ammo-Land