Sunday, February 9, 2014

Neale Osborn Rants for the 41st Time!

So the Supreme Court is going to decide if we can give guns as gifts, or purchase to re-sell, presumably at a profit. [Link]. I hear Victim Disarmers screeching "STRAW MAN STRAW MAN!!!! Osborn supports straw man purchases!!" Yup. I sure as shit do. As I have said a million times before, and probably will a million times in the future, there are no provisions in the Constitution for stripping rights from citizens other than during a prison term. PERIOD. So there can be NO prohibited sales.

These charges stem from question 11a on ATF background check Form 4473, which asks:
Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you.
This question is problematic if interpreted the way it was by those who indicted Abramski because striking down the legality of a law-abiding citizen buying a gun which he or she transfers to another law abiding citizen would also affect buying a gun that one plans to give--to transfer as a gift—to a law abiding citizen. That interpretation effectively criminalizes a father buying a rifle for his son for Christmas or a mother buying a handgun to transfer to her daughter who is going off to college.

Moreover, law-abiding citizens have been buying and selling/transferring guns to one another in the United States since 1787.

I'm sick of our government violating basic rights. ENUMERATED rights.

So, did the Sandy Hook shooter (he'd like me to mention his name) actually kill himself? [Link]. Read the article, then try it yourself. NO, dummy, NOT with a real gun!!! Use the kid's cap gun or something. I just wonder... did a teacher or someone get hold of his gun and execute him? or what?
NOT that I have a problem with that. I just wish the teachers had been permitted the ability to carry the means to do it WITHOUT stealing a criminal's gun.

Now, they change their tune. But Civitas Media DID plan to assemble a "massive state by state database" of CCW holders, using the Freedom of Information Act to obtain these records. [Link]. From an internal e-mail sent by their director of content:
"We are launching two enterprise projects across our newsrooms this month. The first will deal with the creeping influence of heroin in our communities. The deadly drug has quietly taken over, reaching across all age groups and eclipsing meth as the recreational drug of choice. The second project examines the explosion of 'conceal and carry' gun permits across the U.S. Through public records act requests, we will attempt to build state-by-state databases that list those who have the right to carry a concealed weapon."
First off, let me re-iterate—EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN CITIZEN HAS THE RIGHT TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON. laws are passed to strip that right, and licenses are used to make it LOOK like the government is not actually violating the Constitution. It's articles like this that were part of the reason I avoided a CCW for so long. But I digress. When confronted with their perfidy, they made the following response:
Civitas Media never had any plans or intentions of publishing in print or online lists of holders of "conceal and carry" permits. Nor will Civitas Media develop databases of permit holders. A poorly crafted internal memo meant to highlight editorial discussions and planning incorrectly indicated that such a database was being planned; it has been considered and rejected.
—Michael C. Bush, CEO
Believe him at your own risk.

You take your chances when you decide to rob another person. [Link]. I feel sorry for the kid who had to kill a man in order to save his Dad.

The man confronted the homeowner and disarmed him, assaulting him with the rifle, authorities said. The homeowners son saw the man raising the rifle and, fearing the man was about to shoot his father, shot the suspect, killing him instantly.

The thief committed suicide, as far as I am concerned.

I wonder what the Victim Disarmers will say about this? [Link]. I shall have to do a little research, but it sure sounds pretty obvious to me. Of course, being 50, I might have something to say about losing my 2nd Amendment rights when I reach 46....

While I'm not for denying "non-Christian Arabs and Moslems" firearms, it's his right to do so. And, since it's OBVIOUS that Obama voters, ESPECIALLY 2 time Obama voters, do not have the cranial capacity to safely handle a firearm, that part's cool. Thanks, Terry, for two good ones!

Wendy Davis, Liar, abortion rights activist, and candidate for Texas Governor, has found a new strategy for her campaign—Claim she's pro-gun. [Link]. Now, those of you who actually listen to what I say know I'm no fan of the NRA. Rank and file support gun rights, the leadership writes gun laws that violate said rights. Even Wayne LaPierre fails to walk the walk all the time. But their grading system for politicians in regards to their stand on gun rights tends to be pretty accurate. And she got a "F" every time she was rated. So now, when scandals abound in her campaign over her lying claims of single motherhood at 19, she's desperately trying to get gun owners' support by claiming she's now pro-gun. It won't work, Wendy. We are NOT stupid hicks—we can see through your lies. I hope this costs you Democrat votes, as well.

There aren't as many sheeple in Connecticut as we thought from those lines to register their so-called "Assault Weapons" and high-cap magazines. [Link]. Of an estimated 2.4 million magazines (based on retail sales) and 370,000 so-called "Assault Weapons" (again, based on retail sales) owned in Connecticut, only 38,000 magazines and 50,000 rifles were registered under Connecticut's unconstitutional gun and magazine ban.

Weeks after the deadline expired, authorities revealed that 50,016 assault weapons and 38,290 ammunition magazines had been registered.

CT News Junkie reported that it is, "unclear how many gun owners own the banned weapons and magazines, but chose not to comply with the registration requirement."

That's the way we want to see things go—no compliance with unconstitutional laws is the way to go, People!

Rant 41 done!!

No comments:

Post a Comment