October 8, 2014
For decades the Democrat-Liberal-Progressives have wanted to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Hardly a day goes by that a Democrat politician or a fat cat isn't proposing or funding some new law to curtail the right to bear arms. The cry for stricter gun controls or outright repeal of the 2nd Amendment by Democrats, comes on the heels of every shooting anywhere in America. You would think it is their battle cry and their only reason for living.
Perhaps these Democrats and fat cats should explain their 2nd Amendment repeal antics to the woman at the Oklahoma food processing plant. This woman was being stabbed by a black Islamic Jihadist when the CEO of the company pulled out a rifle and shot him just as the Jihadist was about to behead her. She's in the hospital with severe stab wounds but at least she is expected to live. The Black Islamic crazed terrorist had already stabbed and decapitated his first victim.
It's too bad the CEO wasn't a better shot. If he had killed this radical Islamic fruitcake we wouldn't be subjected to his lengthy trial that will come in two or three years after his crime of murder and attempted murder and a possible execution that might come 12 to 15 years after his conviction, if ever.
Unfortunately, America's legal system is not known for swift justice. The witnesses to this Black Terrorist's crime are numerous. He's guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Why don't we just hang him after a short one-day trial instead of paying millions of dollar to all those high-paid attorneys to defend him when everyone knows he is guilty as Hell? The American justice system should really be called the "Permanent-Attorney-Employment-Act" or the "Making-Attorney-Millionaires" system.
But we digress. In another attempt to limit the right to bear arms, proponents in Washington State have two opposing Initiatives on the November 2014 ballot, the Liberals Initiative to expand background checks for gun buyers at gun shows and private and Internet sales (I-594) and the Conservatives Initiative to preserve gun rights (I-591).
I-594 Background Checks: "This measure would apply the currently used criminal and public safety background checks by licensed dealers to all firearm sales and transfers, including gun show and online sales, with specific exceptions."
I-591 Gun Rights Measure: "This measure would prohibit government agencies from confiscating guns or other firearms from citizens without due process, or from requiring background checks on firearm recipients unless a uniform national standard is required."
The money pouring in for the Background Check initiative is running almost 8 to one for those opposing the Initiative. The $7,000,000 campaign funds supporting the expansion of "Background Checks" is coming from the likes of Ex-New York Mayor, Michael Bloomberg and Microsoft Billionaires Bill Gates and Paul Allen. The NRA so far, has only come up with under $1,000,000 to oppose I-594 and support I-591.
Sadly, the red counties of Washington State are totally disenfranchised by those large population blue counties west of the Cascade Mountains. The predominantly left-leaning urban centers of Washington State, including Seattle, Tacoma, Olympia and Everett where most of the population of the state is centered, will approve the Background Check initiative. Except that, the harsh reality is it won't stop criminals from getting guns. It just makes gun control nuts feel good! The Initiative will only affect lawful gun owners and buyers and slow down and restrict their rights to buy and sell guns in legal commerce.
But what is happening in Washington State this year is only the tip of a very large iceberg. Federal and state legislation and initiatives are the front door to their efforts. The back door is much more subtle and devious.
For example, you don't need to confiscate guns if you can render the ammunition scarce or way too expensive. The declining availability of certain types of ammunition has been well documented. Since Obama was elected, demand for guns and ammunition is high but ammunition continues to be in short supply.
One way to make ammunition less available and thus more costly is to dramatically increase the environmental regulations on lead smelters as the EPA did to Doe Run Company's Herculaneum lead smelter plant, the last remaining primary lead smelter in America. The prevailing wisdom seems to be that the closure of this plant won't drastically affect ammunition costs because ammunition manufacturers use mostly recycled lead. However, it will affect those manufacturers that require primary lead. Those manufacturers will have to go off shore, mostly China, to get their product.
Another way to curtail ammunition and raise the price is to ban the use of lead bullets as California has done to state hunters, at the urging of the all powerful wildlife environmentalists.
(SIDEBAR: The Audubon Society, another radical environmental group, was responsible for over 40,000 loggers and wood product employees losing their jobs to the fraud that was the listing of the Northwest Spotted Owl as endangered. It turns out the reason the owl was endangered had nothing to do with loss of habitat due to logging. The Northwest Spotted owl was being eaten by the Barred owl moving west from the Great Plains, a natural event, not a man-made one.)
Then of course the government can buy up a lot of ammunition creating a scarcity in the market place. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did just that with their ongoing purchases of well over a billion rounds of hollow-point and other types of ammunition and fully automatic assault rifles. (Americans can't own fully automatic assault rifles but the government can.) With the ammunition that DHS has purchased, they could shoot every American five times. One might ask why DHS, a non-military federal government agency, would need so many bullets? We tried to get that information with an FOIA request but were given a run-around you wouldn't believe. Oh, and these rounds are being purchased with your tax money.
There is another back door the President and Democrats are using and that is getting Congress to ratify the UN Arms Trade Treaty, more commonly known as the Small Arms Treaty.
According to Wikipedia
"The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is a multilateral treaty which has not entered into force that regulates the international trade in conventional weapons. International weapons commerce has been estimated to reach US$70 billion a year.
The treaty was negotiated at a global conference under the auspices of the United Nations from July 2–27, 2012, in New York. As it was not possible to reach an agreement on a final text at that time, a new meeting for the conference was scheduled for March 18–28, 2013. On 2 April 2013, the UN General Assembly adopted the ATT. The treaty has been signed by 121 states and has been ratified by 53. It will enter into force on 24 December 2014, having been ratified or acceded to by the requisite 50 states.
Your Secretary of State, John Kerry, signed off on the ATT treaty for the United States.
In a Washington Times Article on July 16, 2014 entitled: "Small Arms Treaty - Big 2nd Amendment Threat"
author James A. Lyons writes ….. "A number of major defects in the U.N. treaty were detailed in a letter sent to President Obama in October 2013 by 50 senators — both Republicans and Democrats. The first problem was that the treaty was adopted by majority vote in the U.N. General Assembly, not by consensus, a condition called for by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. After entry into force, the senators contend, the Arms Trade Treaty can be amended by majority vote of signatory countries, effectively negating the Senate’s constitutional treaty power and handing it to foreign governments. Even the State Department concedes, the senators wrote, that the treaty “includes language that could hinder the United States from fulfilling its strategic, legal and moral commitments to provide arms to key allies such as the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the State of Israel.”
Lyons writes further in the article that …..
"Of most concern is the infringement on our constitutional rights, the senators charged. The Arms Trade Treaty 'includes only a weak nonbinding reference to the lawful ownership, use of, and trade in firearms, and recognizes none of these activities, much less individual self-defense, as fundamental individual rights.' When coupled with the treaty’s ceding of interpretive authority to other countries, this poses a direct threat to the Second Amendment."
Obama and the gun control advocates are all for the Small Arms Treaty, but it has virtually no chance of being ratified by the current Congress or in subsequent Congresses, especially if the Republicans take control of the Senate in 2015. Nevertheless, the Democrats will keep trying and if we ever have a Democrat President and a Democrat majority in Congress again, like we did when they passed Obama Care, the Democrats will finally succeed in closing the door and effectively repealing the 2nd Amendment, either by direct legislation, constitutional amendment, or by ratifying the International ATT Treaty.
As the President is so found of saying, "Let me make it clear", we shall also invoke that passage when we tell you that the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting, or even protecting yourself in your own home or in person. It has everything to do with resistance to tyranny and oppression and that is why the Founding Fathers included it in the Bill of Rights.
"The Second Amendment was based partially on the right to keep and bear arms in English common-law and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Sir William Blackstone described this right as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state." [emphasis is ours] (Source)
The U. S. Supreme Court held in the "District of Columbia vs. Heller" decision (2008) that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. In "McDonald vs. Chicago," (2010) the U. S. Supreme Court further clarified its earlier decision with: "that limited the amendment's impact to a restriction on the federal government, expressly holding that the Fourteenth Amendment applies the Second Amendment to state and local governments to the same extent that the Second Amendment applies to the federal government."
Virtually every other country on the planet has severe restrictions or outright bans on gun ownership. England and Australia, supposedly free countries, outlawed guns and confiscated them to such an extent that if a citizen has an illegal gun in his or her possession and shoots a robber to protect his home, he will go to jail, probably longer than the robber. In Australia, when the guns were confiscated, it was documented that violent crime increased.
Ladies and gentlemen, if Americans voluntarily hand over their guns to the government, or allow very strict gun laws to be passed and implemented, or if the government confiscates our guns by force, it will spell the death of a free America. It will also open up the opportunity for a foreign government to take advantage of a country that now does not have a "gun behind every tree."
There will be no turning back the clock and each American will be an indentured servant of an all-powerful government exercising absolute power. Trouble is, we are almost there now. The loss of the 2nd Amendment will be the final chapter in closing and locking the jailhouse door and forever prohibiting armed resistance to oppression and tyranny. Government will be free to unleash its military might on its own people in the event of such resistance and make no mistake, they will. Don't think for one minute that the government will allow an antiquated, 17-page blueprint for freedom get in their way.
[NOTE: The following article represents the opinion of the author and is not necessarily shared by the owners, employees, representatives, or agents of the publisher.]
� 2014 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) (http://www.narlo.org) a non-profit corporation headquartered in Washington State, an advocate and consultant for urban and rural landowners. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].
E-Mail: [email protected]