ObamaCare Not “Law of The Land” ONLY House Can Tax!

ObamaCare.Cartoon_acaonthefritzObamaCare was not written as a tax. Only the House of Representatives in Congress can write a law that creates revenue through a tax, per Article 1 Section 7, of the US Constitution. ObamaCare was presented as a penalty. Thereby rendering it null and void.

We here at PushBackNow.comUSDefenceLeague.com have been effusively attempting to educate the American populace of the factual truth regarding the legality and Constitutionality of: ObamaCare aka The Affordable Care Act. It is NOT in any way, shape or form the “Law of The Land!”

Why?

Because ONLY The US House of Congress can initiate a law, a tax law, a bill or a resolution that demands money from the American People. The bill or law cannot be re-written from a penalty to a tax, created after the fact in SCOTUS, in the midst of a Constitutional review in the highest court of the land:  The United States Supreme Court. As powerful of a court as they are, they cannot create, initiate, birth, write, draft, re-write, implement or mandate ANY laws, bills, taxes, resolutions or Constitutional Amendments period. They can ONLY review the Constitutionality of a case before them!

Again, ObamaCare was not written as a tax. Only the House of Representatives in Congress can write a law that creates revenue through a tax. ObamaCare was presented as a penalty, thereby rendering all Executive Branch, Legislative Branch and Judicial Branch offspring, clones, twins and any variations pertaining to ObamaCare aka ACA (Affordable Care Act) null and void. And Here’s proof… One last thing, after you read it, share it, teach it and preach it. This is Truth, and Truth always prevails.

Article 1. Section. 7.

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html#1.7

This should be the end of the conversation, but alas the proponents of the anti-ethical and burdensome ObamaCare Socialist One Payer Anti-American dream repeat their false mantra that it is the “law of the land” so deal with it. It is not. You deal with that! Liberals and radical Democrats and, unfortunately even some RINOs, have similar dreams for illegals to be supported by the ‘one-percenters’ and middle-income Americans amidst this great Republic of The United States of America. The Affordable Care Act’s weight will be shouldered by the healthiest and hardest working and doled out indiscriminately. The method of administering ObamaCare via its ‘Marketplace’ is another discussion entirely. And the means, using the IRS The Internal Revenue Service to regulate after such partisan assaults would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous! The facts are facts and ObamaCare/Affordable Care Act is a reprehensible illegal mandate pushed onto the American people via unauthorized, illegitimate and UN-Constitutional means. It is therefore NULL and VOID. Take that Mr. President, Democratic Congress, RINOs, et al, or, submit yourselves unto the legislative mulch you created and languish thusly by applying ObamaCare to yourselves at once! We The People will stand up against this, and every unlawful mandate and protect our Republic.  Now let’s hear from another Wide Awake Conservative voice. ~-PBN read more

FOX’s Bill Hemmer goes off on law enforcement officials who leaked wrong suspect photos to press, including him: ‘My jaw dropped’

One of the burning questions this author had in the wake of the New York Post releasing photos of two men it was told from law enforcement officials were wanted for questioning, only to have the debunked by the afternoon, focused on Fox’s Bill Hemmer. On Thursday’s “Fox and Friends,” anchor Gretchen Carlson held up the Post’s cover on-air and noted — albeit cautiously — that select members of the media had been shown the photos, and that Fox’s own Bill Hemmer was one of them.

That left one question: If Hemmer had been shown the pictures and they turned out to be ​not ​of the actual suspects, why didn’t Hemmer either stop Carlson or correct the record?

Now it appears we may know.

According to a strongly worded explanation on Friday morning with Carlson and the “Fox and Friends” crew, at least one law enforcement official was feeding the media misinformation.

After host Brian Kilmeade asked if the photos that were released by the FBI yesterday were the ones Hemmer had seen, he responded with a simple, direct “No.”

Then he began: “My jaw dropped yesterday when we were watching that news conference. It was one of those head-turners where you’re like, ‘Whoa! Now this is a curve ball.’”

“There is someone within the investigative unit of this story that has done the FBI a huge disservice,” he added later. “They took images, many many images, I’m talking dozens of images, and they set up websites that just about every American has the ablility to access. And they made it seem and appear that they were in search of other individuals, maybe two, three, or four others. And those images– you know they went around the ether. And people looked at them and they thought, ‘Well, obviously these must be the guys.’ Who was it on the inside who would even take those images, think about establishing a website, and put out misinformation. And I think one of the stories that will be talked about once this is all resolved is how the FBI and Boston police go back and look at their own investigative personnel to find out who had access to it, and who had the motivation to put out bad information…”

h/t The Blaze

“This isn’t Iraq dude, this is Temple Texas.” Active Duty Soldier Illegally Disarmed and Arrested

A young man out for a walk with Dad working on his 10 mile Eagle Scout patch witnessed his fathers illegal detainment and arrest in Temple Tx. Yes America, this is what we are coming to.  Gun laws are becoming as useless as the Constitution is to Obama. Below is a link to help this Iraqi/ Afghanistan war veteran.


On March 16, 2013, my son and I were hiking along country roads among pastures and fields with my 15-year old son to help him earn his hiking merit badge. I always enjoy these father/son hikes because it gives me time alone with my son. As I always do when we go on these hikes and walks, I took my trusty rifle with me as there are coyotes, wild hogs, and cougars in our area. In Texas, it is legal to openly carry a rifle or shotgun as long as you do so in a manner that isn’t calculated to cause alarm. In other words, you can’t walk around waving your rifle at people. I always carry my rifle slung across my chest dangling, not holding it in my hands.

At about the 5 mile mark of our hike, a voice behind us asked us to stop and the officer motioned for us to approach him. He got out of his car and met us a few feet later. He asked us what we were doing and I explained that we were hiking for my son’s merit badge. He then asked me what I’m doing with the rifle, to which I responded in a calm manner, “Does it matter, officer? Am I breaking the law?”

At that point, the officer grabbed my rifle without warning or indication. He didn’t ask for my rifle and he didn’t suggest he would take it from me. He simply grabbed it. This startled me and I instantly pulled back – the rifle was attached to me – and I asked what he thought he was doing because he’s not taking my rifle. He then pulled his service pistol on me and told me to take my hands off the weapon and move to his car, which I complied with. He then slammed me into the hood of his car and I remembered I had a camera on me (one of the requirements of the hiking merit badge is to document your hikes). This video is the rest of that encounter. Up to this point, I am not told why I am being stopped, why he tried to disarm me, or even that I’m under arrest.

We did not set out that Saturday morning to “make a point” or cause problems. Our goal was to complete a 10-mile hike and return home without incident. My son chose a route that away from populated areas but near our home.

The arresting officer is Officer Steve Ermis and the supervisor is Sergeant Minnicks of the Temple Police Department.

If you agree this was a gross act of exceeded authority, please help me fight these charges: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/2nd-amendment-legal-defense-fund/x/2679348

Missouri Highway Patrol released names of 163,000 Missourians concealed weapons permit holders to Social Security Admin

Kiss your butt gun control

This has taken place twice in the past two years. Bill SB 252 Prohibits the Department of Revenue from retaining copies of source documents used to obtain driver’s licenses and modifies other driver’s license provisions

Read how the feds are buying enough bullets for a 24 year war against US citizens while disarming us which prevents us from defending ourselves.  

When questioned by committee Chairman Kurt Schaefer on April 11, Missouri State Highway Patrol Col. Ron Replogle admitted “his agency had turned over the data.”

The information was passed to the Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General in Nov. 2011 and again in Jan. 2012. Replogle claims the information was encrypted and the discs holding the information were destroyed.

“[The feds] said no names were retrieved,” Replogle said. “They do not have those names. They did not disseminate that information,” he claimed. He also stressed “all that information has been destroyed.”

The investigation into leaked personal information began after suspicions arose over new drivers license rules requiring citizens to bring in numerous personal documents–including concealed carry permit information–to be “scanned and retained.”

Replogle said the names were turned over to “cross-check… names on the concealed carry list with [the federal] agency’s list of those with disabilities attributed to mental illness to find possible evidence of fraud in the system.”

“It is clearly a violation of one’s personal privacy, not to mention Missouri law, and I cannot adequately express to you my incredible concern over this request” Luetkemeyer

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon (D) has been denying that “concealed weapons permits were turned over to a ‘magical database’ for federal agents to ‘mess with.'”

JEFFERSON CITY • The Missouri Highway Patrol admitted on Thursday that it released the names of more than 163,000 Missourians who have concealed weapons permits to a federal agent twice in the past two years.

Gov. Jay Nixon’s administration maintains that the releases were legal and done to aid an investigation, but that has done little to calm Republicans’ concerns over what they see as a breach of privacy rights and potential evidence of intrusive gun tactics from the federal government.

“I’m very concerned that this may be a back-door attempt to create the Eric Holder gun registry,” said House Speaker Tim Jones, R-Eureka, referring to the U.S. attorney general. “Missourians are very much opposed to this type of government overreach and intrusion.”

The admission comes as statehouse Republicans are decrying the state’s new method of scanning images of personal documents needed for drivers license registrations. It also emerged as a new flashpoint in a national debate over gun rights in the wake of the child murders in Newtown, Conn.

Missouri Highway Patrol Col. Ron Replogle told the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday that a Social Security Administration agent based in St. Louis wanted the concealed-carry permit information for an investigation into disability fraud related to mental illness claims.

The list of permit holders was going to be compared with a list of Social Security recipients to see whether anyone who had met the mental health qualifications for a concealed carry permit had also sought benefits for a mental illness. Replogle said the encrypted information was mailed to the agent twice on password-protected discs, but both times, the agent was unable to access the data.

“In our opinion, it was a criminal investigation,” Replogle said.

The Social Security Administration did not respond to requests for comment from the Post-Dispatch.

Senators weren’t eased by the fact that the lists were never opened.

“The harm isn’t actually that they were read or not read, the harm is that, with reckless abandon, what is a private database in the state of Missouri with private information … was given out on discs with apparently not even a written request,” said Senate Appropriations Chair Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia. “That’s the issue.”

Under state law, disclosing information about concealed carry holders is a misdemeanor, and Schaefer said he believed the release of the lists violated that law.

But Department of Public Safety deputy director Andrea Spillars said the sharing of information among law enforcement agencies was legal and common.

She told the Appropriations Committee the agency could do it again legally, but the department recently implemented a policy to require such requests to undergo additional scrutiny.

Nixon, in Kirkwood to survey tornado damage Thursday, also told the Post-Dispatch that the state agencies acted within their legal authority.

“I’ll only say that, as is our usual process and procedure, we’ve followed the laws and we’ll continue to,” said Nixon, a Democrat.

But Republicans quickly seized on the privacy issue, which had been steadily building amid speculation over the administration’s handling of private information related to drivers licenses by the Department of Revenue.

“This is a big breach of public trust,” said Sen. Dan Brown, a Republican from Rolla on the Appropriations Committee.

The Highway Patrol got the concealed carry lists from the Department of Revenue’s licensing arm, which maintains the data. But the release of the concealed carry lists apparently had nothing to do with the DOR’s new licensing system that lawmakers have been investigating for several weeks. The first concealed carry list was sent in November 2011, before the new system went into effect, and Replogle said the Revenue Department probably had had the ability to compile one for several years.

Jones said concerns over the concealed carry lists and Missouri’s new drivers licenses were “intertwined.” Without the ongoing investigation into the licenses and the Department of Revenue’s handling of private information, it’s unlikely that lawmakers would have stumbled upon the details of the release of the concealed carry lists, he said.

Lawmakers began airing concerns over the Department of Revenue’s new license system last month, and questions primarily focused on whether it was being used to send data to the federal government or implement the federal Real ID Act in violation of state law. The new process includes electronic scanning of personal identification documents, including birth certificates, marriage licenses and concealed carry certifications.

In several hearings at the Capitol, officials from the Revenue Department told lawmakers that the new process was intended to make licenses more secure. They have repeatedly said the new scanning policy is not an attempt to implement Real ID and the process is not being used to share documents with the federal government.

Schaefer said finding out about the concealed carry lists was “like extracting teeth.” After hours of inquiry, with questions often repeated in varying ways, Schaefer latched onto the issue of whether concealed carry lists had ever been created and shared outside of the new system. After some vague answers, officials eventually admitted Wednesday night that the Department of Revenue had given concealed carry lists to the state Highway Patrol.

Later in the evening, they returned to say that Highway Patrol handed the information over to a federal agent. Replogle’s testimony, filing in the details of the federal requests, came Thursday morning, but early reports had already started to garner national attention.

Some Republicans called on Nixon to fire those responsible for the release. They also have accused the governor’s administration of covering up the details.

Missouri Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-St. Elizabeth, sent letters to officials in the Social Security Administration and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Thursday seeking more information about the federal government’s role in the information release.

“It is clearly a violation of one’s personal privacy, not to mention Missouri law, and I cannot adequately express to you my incredible concern over this request,” Luetkemeyer wrote in the letters, requesting specific details about the nature of the request, as well as private meetings with top federal officials.

State Auditor Tom Schweich is auditing the Department of Revenue. The House Government Oversight Committee has launched its own investigation, and Jones said he would give the committee the power to subpoena for information — a tactic Schaefer used in his investigation of whether Revenue is working toward Real ID requirements.

Jones also has called on Attorney General Chris Koster to appoint an independent investigative committee to look into the Department of Revenue’s handling of private information. Koster’s office did not respond to the Post-Dispatch’s request for comment.

Meanwhile, the state House and Senate have each given early approval to legislation that would block the Revenue Department from scanning documents used to obtain drivers licenses.

Sources Breitbart and St. Louis Today

What Does The Bible Say About Gun Control?

Bible-and-Gun
What Does The Bible Say About Gun Control? Larry Pratt keenly observed the difference between self-defense and vengeance:
read more

UNCLASSIFIED Crucial Information: Mass Shootings Analysis – Commonalities and Trends

Biden_Shotgun
USA, the guns that were used in these past US mass shooting atrocities were not automatic military style weapons. Some were semi automatic and some were handguns and shotguns. And while we are on the topic the word “assault weapon” can be used in place of ANY weapon for that is what weapons are meant to do, either defend the assault or prevent by offensive measures an impending assault. The Obama Administration’s support of Senator Feinstein’s Gun Ban is not meant to prevent future atrocities instead its ultimate goal is to control the masses and general law abiding populace in order to rule by “fiat” more readily -PBN

NJROIC-Mass Shootings .PDF

INFORMATION NOTICE: This product contains unclassified information that is for official use only ( U//FOUO ).

Obama’s Silent Pro-Islamic War Against America Happening On US Soil Now

Obama is Muslim.  He is Islamic.

Obama is Islamic.

USA and all of Western Civilization – ask yourself this question. What Christian or Jew would go into a Catholic church or any church or temple and cover a Cross or any Christian or Jewish symbol? None that we know of. But Obama has done such  despicable things.

Why?

Because he is indeed very much not a Christian. Barak Hussein Obama was raised to be Muslim and as such believes what the Koran states: That all Christians/Catholics/Jews and Non-Muslims are “Infidels” = “Worse than Unbelievers.” – Obama is practicing “Taqiyya” which means “to deceive with approval for the purposes of furthering Islam”.  He is fluent in Arabic, reciting Muslim Prayers, and in deciphering the Koran due to his Indonesian & devout Muslim upbringing.  Obama reveres the Koran, unlike the Bible, which he seems  to abhor (revealed by his order to cover the Christ symbol at Georgetown University in a speech dated April 14th, 2009) See bottom of article for proof and link.

For the record, the Bible was written over 600 years before Mohammad plagiarized the Koran. There is sufficient evidence that the Koran borrowed scripture, which is a crime of forgery, and twisted it by adding the recitations/writings of Muhammad through an alleged vision/trance by a visitation of the “Angel Gabriel”. “Satan comes as an angel of light…” Do not be deceived. “Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.” – 2 John 1:7. The true Angel Gabriel’s visitation already announced the True Messiah through the Virgin Mary, the Holy Mother of Jesus born not of man’s will but by God the Father’s through the miraculous overshadowing of the Holy Spirit upon the Virgin Mary’s womb.  Jesus, “Emmanuel” means God with Us.

If you’re hungry to read more of the word click here.

Obama, and his profoundly Anti Semitic, Anti-Christian and Anti-Western Civilization Islamic allies within his Administration and elsewhere, have been silently, effectively, aiding and abetting Islamic Terrorists on US Soil and abroad on US Embassy turf. The ongoing cover up of Obama’s lack of leadership in all things Military is transparently clear when using terms like  “speed bumps” to expound upon the terror brought to the families of the Benghazi Four. US Citizens died in Benghazi Libya at the Special Diplomatic Mission because of a covert US/Syria Arms deal. We will not stand idly by and watch history attempt to be re-written as it unfolds so that Political Correctness will run rampant with its twisted versions of the “truth”.

The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928, is a militant, pro-sharia law organization that has used both violent and non-violent means to achieve its ultimate goal of restoring the Muslim caliphate and the glory of the Islamic empire. The Muslim Brotherhood has spawned dozens and dozens of organizations across the globe, including the terrorist organizations al Qaeda and Hamas. Today, numerous Muslim organizations in America are either actively connected to the Muslim Brotherhood or owe their existence to the Muslim Brotherhood. In 2004, federal investigators discovered a Muslim Brotherhood memorandum during a search of a northern Virginia home. The memorandum, written by Mohamed Akram for the Muslim Brotherhood’s Shura Council, described a “civilization jihad” aimed at North America. It stated: “The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Gods religion is made victorious over all other religions.” This explanatory memorandum also included a list of 29 Muslim Brotherhood connected organizations in the U.S. The memorandum was entered into evidence at the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial in 2007-2008. Entire Article Here.

Obama is so very Anti Christian that he had instructed White House personnel to have Georgetown University cover all Christian symbols prior to his arrival and his speech there on April 14th, 2009. ~ M. Katherine Orts and husband Pastor David A. Orts founders of USDefenseLeague

Georgetown Alter Unaltered Prior to Obama's Speech at iGeorgetown University

Unaltered Alter at Georgetown University Depicting Christian Symbol.

Georgetown Altar Expunged of Christian Symbols AFter Obama Had White House Order it done.

Obama Had Ordered Christian Symbol Covered. It Was Covered Over with Black Painted Wood For Obama’s April 14th, 2009 Speech at Georgetown University.

Obama Speaking Georgetown University April 14, 2009 Altar Behind Him Now Void of Christian Symbols after he demanded them covered.

Obama Speaking, Georgetown University April 14, 2009 Altar Behind Him Now Void of Christian Symbols after he demanded them covered.

 

US Feds Prepping For Civil Unrest

http://oda141teamroom.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/civilunrest.jpg

Imagine the worst-case scenario if the sequester goes through. The market nosedives. The economy implodes. Empty shelves. Riots. The feds hit the streets in force to restore order in a “national emergency.”

Sounds like something in a Third World country or Greece. It could never happen here, right? Think again, says Sarah Palin.

The former Alaska governor and Republican vice-presidential nominee believes the federal government is “stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.”

Palin says the feds are afraid of what might happen if the sequester goes into effect.

She writes on her Facebook page: “If we are going to wet our proverbial pants over 0.3% in annual spending cuts when we’re running up trillion dollar annual deficits, then we’re done. Put a fork in us. We’re finished. We’re going to default eventually and that’s why the feds are stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.”

The sequester will trigger $85 billion in immediate cuts to federal funding and $1.2 trillion over 10 years unless lawmakers reach a deal by Friday.

The prospect of civil unrest puts a chilling spin on an off-teleprompter remark then-candidate Barack Obama made in a Colorado campaign speech in July, 2008.

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded,” said candidate Obama.

Palin’s warning echoes a WND report Feb. 17 citing radio host Mark Levin’s point that federal non-military agencies have purchased enough ammunition recently not only to shoot every American five times but also engage in a prolonged, domestic war.

Why do federal agencies need all that ammunition?

The government’s official explanation for the massive ammo buy is that law enforcement agents in the respective agencies need the bullets for “mandatory quarterly firearms qualifications and other training sessions.”

The staggering number and lack of details in the official explanation, however, has led to rampant speculation, including concerns DHS is arming itself to fight off insurrection by Americans.

“To provide some perspective,” Levin noted, “experts estimate that at the peak of the Iraq war American troops were firing around 5.5 million rounds per month. At that rate, the [DHS] is armed now for a 24-year Iraq war. A 24-year Iraq war!

“I’m going to tell you what I think is going on,” Levin offered. “I don’t think domestic insurrection. Law enforcement and national security agencies, they play out multiple scenarios. I’ll tell you what I think they’re simulating: the collapse of our financial system, the collapse of our society and the potential for widespread violence, looting, killing in the streets, because that’s what happens when an economy collapses.

“I suspect that just in case our fiscal situation, our monetary situation, collapses, and following it the civil society collapses, that is the rule of law, they want to be prepared,” Levin said. “I know why the government’s arming up: It’s not because there’s going to be an insurrection; it’s because our society is unraveling.”

As WND reported last August, news that the Social Security Administration was set to purchase 174,000 rounds of hollow-point bullets for 41 locations across the country followed word of major ammo buys by the DHS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

A solicitation posted by the SSA on the FedBizOpps website asked for contractors to supply 174,000 rounds of .357 Sig 125 grain bonded jacketed hollow-point pistol ammunition.

An online ammunition retailer described the bullets as suitable “for peak performance rivaling and sometimes surpassing handloads in many guns,” noting that the ammo is “a great personal defense bullet.”

WND has been at the forefront of reporting growing federal police power across dozens of government agencies for more than a decade and a half.

  • In 1997, WND blew the lid off 60,000 federal agents enforcing over 3,000 criminal laws, a report that prompted Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America to remark, “Good grief, that’s a standing army. … It’s outrageous.”
  • Also in 1997, as part of a ongoing series on the militarization of the federal government, WND reported on the armed, “environment crime” cops employed by the Environmental Protection Agency and a federal law enforcement program that had trained 325,000 prospective federal police since 1970.
  • WND also reported on thousands of armed officers in the Inspectors’ General office and a gun-drawn raid on a local flood control center to haul off 40 boxes of … paperwork.
  • WND further reported on a plan by then Delaware Sen. Joe Biden to hire hundreds of armed Hong Kong policemen into dozens of U.S. federal agencies to counter Asian organized crime in America.
  • In 1999, WND CEO Joseph Farah warned there were more than 80,000 armed federal law enforcement agents, constituting “the virtual standing army over which the founding fathers had
    nightmares.” Today, that number has nearly doubled.
  • Also in 1999 WND reported plans made for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, to use military and police forces to deal with Y2K.
  • In 2000, Farah discussed a Justice Department report on the growth of federal police agents under President Clinton, something Farah labeled “the biggest arms buildup in the history of the
    federal government – and it’s not taking place in the Defense Department.”
  • A 2001 report warned of a persistent campaign by the Department of the Interior, this time following 9/11, to gain police powers for its agents.
  • In 2008, WND reported on proposed rules to expand the military’s use inside U.S. borders to prevent “environmental damage” or respond to “special events” and to establish policies for “military support for civilian law enforcement.”
  • Most recently, WND reported that while local police have found themselves short of necessary ammunition, the federal government has been stockpiling billions of rounds for its non-military, non-FBI law enforcement officers.

Recently, other media outlets have begun to take notice of the alarming trend.

Andrew Malcolm wrote Feb. 8 for Investors.com: “In a puzzling, unexplained development, the Obama administration has been buying and storing vast amounts of ammunition in recent months, with the Department of Homeland Security just placing another order for an additional 21.6 million rounds.

“Several other agencies of the federal government also began buying large quantities of bullets last year. The Social Security Administration, for instance, not normally considered on the frontlines of anything but dealing with seniors, explained that its purchase of millions of rounds was for special agents’ required quarterly weapons qualifications. They must be pretty poor shots.”

Another recent report questions the motives of the DHS.

On Jan. 4, Ryan Keller wrote at Examiner.com: “DHS has stockpiled nearly 2 billion rounds of ammo. This is an unusually large amount for a federal agency to be stockpiling. The agency has refused to give an explanation for these purchases, going so far as to black out information on another solicitation, which is illegal without Congressional authorization or in response to national security issues.

“The typical response from the media has been that the rounds are for target practice; however, hollow points are not used for target shooting. Hollow points are too expensive and not designed for target practice; instead, full metal jacket rounds are used for training.”

By Garth Kant

Source Here:

3:00am Gunstory: Do you have ready access? Are you trained in gun safety?

It’s 3:00am. Do You Know Where Your Gun Is?

Imagine it’s 3:00am. It’s late, its dark, you cant sleep or you work late hours and you have stepped outside to check on your cat, your dog, your car, your porch-light, or to smoke a cigarette like the woman in this following true story. Do you own a gun? Do you know where your gun is? Do you have ready access? Are you trained in gun safety, when and how to use deadly force? Be ready. Be prepared. This true report could have ended in tragedy if these two sisters weren’t allowed to own or have a gun.-PBN

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/c0.0.395.395/p403x403/529046_142383425920686_1316472421_n.jpg

The gun was a gift from a friend but it mostly stayed in a side-table drawer, she said, gathering dust. Then, early Sunday morning, Keeney pulled the trigger again — this time, she said, to save her sister’s life.

“I’m very grateful that it fired this morning,” she said Sunday afternoon.

Keeney, 55, said a man forced his way into her apartment in Highland, threw her to the floor and then put her sister, Donna Carlyle, 47, in a choke hold. He demanded money as Carlyle gasped for air.

“All I could see was Donna’s face going blue, like her life was being choked out of her,” said Keeney The alleged intruder, 33, was being treated at a hospital Sunday for two gunshot wounds and was listed in critical condition, police said. They have not released his name. The incident occurred about 3:30 a.m. at an apartment complex in the 2600 block of Eagle Way in Highland. Keeney and Carlyle live next door to each other. Carlyle was visiting her sister’s apartment when the assault happened. Highland Police Chief Terry Bell said Sunday that the man was shot twice and that police were still “piecing it together.” He added that he had no information to believe the man knew the women. Police for now are keeping the gun as evidence.

Keeney said she thought she only shot the man once with her gun, which she described as a five-shot, .22-caliber derringer. The first bullet she fired, she said, was supposed to be a warning shot.

Keeney also said neither she nor her sister knew the intruder.

“I have no idea where he came from or where he was going,” she said.

She had a clue something was wrong on Friday night, she said, when someone was heard going through the complex jiggling door knobs. She took the gun out from the drawer that night and laid it on top of the side table.

On Sunday afternoon, Keeney expressed some remorse but also pointed out that she felt she had no choice but to use the gun.

“I wish I hadn’t shot him,” she said. “I gave him an opportunity to leave. I wish he had left without me having to shoot him. … I hate the idea that I had to pull that trigger.”

Still, she added, “Put in the same situation, I would do it again.”

Some of her neighbors did not second-guess her actions.

“I’m proud of her for shooting that dude,” said Rodney Rusick, 68, who lives a few doors down.

Illinois’ self-defense law allows a homeowner to use deadly force if an intruder breaks in violently, or if the homeowner believes deadly force is the only way to prevent the intruder from committing a felony.

Keeney says she was attacked after stepping outside her apartment to smoke a cigarette.

“As I was closing the door behind me, this really big man pushed his way through the door,” she recalled. “I started pushing back. … He put one arm behind my arm and picked me up and threw me over my couch.”

The man then went behind a recliner, where her sister was sitting, and put Carlyle in a choke hold.

“He had her trapped like a rat,” Keeney said.

Carlyle said she was trying to dial 911 with a cellphone in her left hand while fighting for air with her right hand.

“When he was yanking me up, my feet were in the air,” Carlyle said. “It hurt so bad. I couldn’t lean forward. I could feel the air closing off. I couldn’t breathe at all.”

Keeney said she grabbed the gun — the side table is near the apartment door — and warned the man to let her sister go. He was demanding money, but Keeney said she and her sister both have multiple health problems and support themselves with disability benefits.

“We both were saying we don’t have any money,” she said. “If we would have had any money, we would have given it to him.”

Keeney says she then fired what she thought was a warning shot.

“I told him, ‘I’m going to shoot you if you don’t let her go,’ ” she recalled. “With that, I shot him in the back because he moved from behind the chair. He let her go. He took some steps toward me.”

The man fell to the floor, and Keeney stood over him, waiting for police to arrive.

“I was scared to death that he was going to kill my sister,” she said. “It was dark. He was a huge man, and it was 3-something in the morning.”

One neighbor, Lynn Palenchar, 69, heard the commotion but did not learn what happened until later.

“I was absolutely stunned,” she said. “You don’t expect something like that to happen. I’m just glad both are OK. If he had picked my place over theirs, it would have been a lot worse.”

Source Here: http://www.gopusa.com/news/2013/02/11/woman-shoots-intruder-saves-self-and-sister/?subscriber=1

Senators Stealthfully Seek Gun-sale Background Checks

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/gun-show.jpg?w=500WASHINGTON (AP) — A bipartisan quartet of senators, including two National Rifle Association members and two with “F” ratings from the potent firearms lobby, are quietly trying to find a compromise on expanding the requirement for gun-sale background checks.

Answer our poll question. Should citizens in the United States be banned from possessing semi-automatic weapons and high capacity magazines?

A deal, given a good chance by several participants and lobbyists, could add formidable political momentum to one of the key elements of President Barack Obama’s gun control plan. Currently, background checks are required only for sales by the nation’s 55,000 federally licensed gun dealers, but not for gun show, person-to-person sales or other private transactions.

The senators’ talks have included discussions about ways to encourage states to make more mental health records available to the national system and the types of transactions that might be exempted from background checks, such as sales among relatives or to those who have permits to carry concealed weapons, said people who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to describe the negotiations publicly.

The private discussions involve liberal Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who is the No. 3 Senate Democratic leader; West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, an NRA member and one of the chamber’s more moderate Democrats; Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., another NRA member and one of the more conservative lawmakers in Congress; and moderate GOP Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois.

“It will not limit your ability to borrow your Uncle Willie’s hunting rifle or share a gun with your friend at a shooting range,” Schumer said last week in one of the senators’ few public remarks about the package the group is seeking. He said he believed a bipartisan deal could be reached.

Polls show that requiring background checks for nearly all gun purchases has more public support than Obama’s proposals to ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines, and it is among those given the best chance of enactment. Even so, it is opposed by the NRA and many congressional Republicans, who consider it intrusive and unworkable for a system they say already has flaws.

“My problem with background checks is you’re never going to get criminals to go through background checks,” Wayne LaPierre, NRA executive vice president, told the Senate Judiciary Committee at its gun control hearing last week.

An agreement among the four senators could help overcome that opposition by opening the door to support from other conservative Republicans besides Coburn. It also could make it easier to win backing from Democratic senators from GOP-leaning states, many of whom face re-election next year and who have been leery of embracing Obama’s proposals.

Schumer and Kirk each have “F” scores from the NRA, while Coburn and Manchin have “A” ratings.

Prompted by the December massacre of 20 first-graders and six adults in Newtown, Conn., the Democratic-led Judiciary Committee plans to write gun control legislation in the next few weeks. The committee’s chairman, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., has expressed strong support for universal background checks and it is expected to be a cornerstone of his bill, but a version of that language with bipartisan support could give the entire package a boost.

“If the language is meaningful, it would be obviously a huge step,” said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, which represents child welfare, religious and other groups favoring gun curbs. “To have someone like Coburn, who’s voted consistently with the gun lobby, to come out and endorse a meaningful background check would be very helpful.”

It is likely that any gun-control bill will need 60 votes to pass the 100-member Senate. Democrats have 55 votes, including two Democratic-leaning independents.

Leaders of the GOP-run House are planning to see what, if anything, the Senate passes before moving on gun legislation. Strategists believe that a measure that passes the Senate with clear bipartisan support could pressure the House to act.

Federal data on gun purchases is gathered by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which is run by the FBI.

According to Justice Department estimates, the federal and state governments ran 108 million background checks of firearms sales between 1994 when the requirement became law and 2009. Of those, 1.9 million — almost 2 percent — were denied, usually because would-be purchasers had criminal records.

People legally judged to be “mentally defective” are among those blocked by federal law from firearms purchases. States are supposed to make mental health records available to the federal background check system and receive more generous Justice Department grants if they do, but many provide little or no such data because of privacy concerns or antiquated record-keeping systems.

Coburn got involved in the background check talks about two weeks ago and says a compromise could make it harder for dangerous people to acquire firearms.

“The whole goal is to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminals,” he said in a brief interview.

Manchin could be particularly influential with Democrats like Sens. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, and Mark Pryor, D-Ark., who face re-election next year in deeply Republican states. Besides being an NRA member, Manchin ran a campaign ad in 2010 in which he promised to defend West Virginian’s Second Amendment rights to bear arms and “take on” the Obama administration — all while shooting a hole in a copy of a Democratic bill that would have clamped limits on greenhouse gases — another sore spot for a coal-mining state like West Virginia.

In an interview, Manchin said that besides hoping for a background check compromise, he wanted inclusion of a commission that would study “how our culture has gotten so desensitized toward violence.”

Participating senators declined to provide details of the talks. But people following the discussions say the talks have touched on:

—The types of family relatives who would be allowed to give guns to each other without a background check.

—Possibly exempting sales in remote areas.

—Whether to help some veterans who sought treatment for traumatic stress disorder — now often barred from getting firearms — become eligible to do so.

An NRA spokesman, Andrew Arulanandam, declined to comment on the senators’ discussions.

A Short History of America’s Gun Law Confiscations

312469_501518569914220_1278991991_nIn this short but cogent post by VotingAmerican you can clearly see, what every whinny liberal and centered conservative knows. And that is that the vast majority of Americans do not trust any form of Government to be able to protect them. We also realize that making thes guns black market just ups the ante for decent law abiding citizens thereby giving the criminal element a peek at our hand. But will it happen?  We say, if and or when the government tries to take the law abiding citizens guns, it will be a blood bath. Molon Labe. -PBN

A poll by Anderson Robbins Research (D) / Shaw & Company Research (R) found that 52% of Democrats say they would refuse to comply.

Only 22% of Americans believe gun control will reduce crime

58% of Americans believe violent crime would be reduced if more people had guns

65% of American gun owners say they would defy gun confiscation

52% of gun owning Democrats would defy gun confiscation

70% of gun owning Republicans would defy gun confiscation

73% of gun owning Independents would defy gun confiscation

77% of gun owning Men would defy gun confiscation

52% of gun owning Women would defy gun confiscation

68% of gun owning whites would defy gun confiscation

54% of gun owning non-whites would defy gun confiscation

58% of gun owners with a college degree would defy gun confiscation

69% of gun owners without a college degree would defy gun confiscation

Among every segment of the gun owning population, a majority says they will defy gun confiscation.

549907_460544357334039_1143826317_n

24429_401645629927187_779610016_n

The Green Berets say ‘WATCH OUT’ regarding Obama’s Gun Ban [Special Music Video Posted]

“Throughout history, disarming the populace has always preceded tyrants’ accession of power. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all disarmed their citizens prior to installing their murderous regimes.” -PBN

Politicians, pundits and private citizens have been sounding off on Barack Obama’s new push for gun bans, but what do the professionals whose job it is to use guns in the protection of their nation, their fellow countrymen and themselves say?

Watch out.

An open letter has been posted on the Professional Soldiers blog that has been signed as of this writing by more than 1,100 current and former U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers, the Green Berets.

The soldiers say first it’s important to define the issue and set the record straight.

“The terms ‘assault weapon’ and ‘assault rifle’ are often confused,” they say. “According to Bruce H. Kobayashi and Joseph E. Olson, writing in the Stanford Law and Policy Review, ‘Prior to 1989, the term ‘assault weapon’ did not exist in the lexicon of firearms. It is a political term, developed by anti-gun publicists to expand the category of assaults rifles.’”

The Green Berets, who use the weapons, point out the M4A1 carbine is a U.S. military service rifle – it is an assault rifle.”

Keep your gun rights: Sign new petition


“The AR-15 is not an assault rifle. The ‘AR’ in its name does not stand for ‘Assault Rifle’ – it is the designation from the first two letters of the manufacturer’s name – ArmaLite Corporation. The AR-15 is designed so that it cosmetically looks like the M4A1 carbine assault rifle, but it is impossible to configure the AR-15 to be a fully automatic assault rifle. It is a single shot semi-automatic rifle that can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. The M4A1 can fire up to 950 rounds per minute. In 1986, the federal government banned the import or manufacture of new fully automatic firearms for sale to civilians. Therefore, the sale of assault rifles are already banned or heavily restricted!”

Likewise, they say, a ban on “high-capacity” magazines would be irrelevant, pointing to the shooting by Eric Harris at Columbine High School as proof. The letter explains that when the first weapons ban was adopted in 1994, manufacturers retooled their products to meet the requirements of the law.

“One of those ban-compliant firearms was the Hi-Point 995, which was sold with ten-round magazines. In 1999, five years into the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the Columbine High School massacre occurred. One of the perpetrators, Eric Harris, was armed with a Hi-Point 995. Undeterred by the ten-round capacity of his magazines, Harris simply brought more of them: thirteen magazines would be found in the massacre’s aftermath. Harris fired 96 rounds before killing himself.”

And, underlying the issue, the letter says, is the Constitution’s assurance of protection for the “sacrosanct” right of self-defense.

“Our Constitution established a system of governance that preserves, protects, and holds sacrosanct the individual rights and primacy of the governed as well as providing for the explicit protection of the governed from governmental tyranny and/or oppression,” they say..

They write that it is easy to blame guns, but weapons aren’t really the problem. Civilized society already proves it, they contend.

“We cite the experience in Great Britain,” they write. In 1987 was the Hungerford massacre that killed 18, and the government followed with a 1988 law banning semi-automatic guns. But eight years later, a “disturbed” man murdered 16 children and a teacher the Dunblane school. Immediately the law was amended to ban “all private ownership of handguns.”

Somehow, criminals apparently didn’t get the message, the letter suggests.

“Despite having the toughest gun control laws in the world, gun related crimes increased in 2003 by 35 percent over the previous year with firearms used in 9,974 recorded crimes… Gun related homicides were up 32 percent over the same period. … Gun related crime had increased 65 percent since the Dunblane massacre and implementation of the toughest gun control laws in the developed world,” the letter says.

“In contrast, in 2009 (5 years after the Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired) total firearm related homicides in the U.S. declined by 9 percent from the 2005 high,” the letter says, citing FBI statistics.

Since gun bans don’t really impact violence, what is the issue at hand?

“The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny,” the Green Berets say.

“Throughout history, disarming the populace has always preceded tyrants’ accession of power. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all disarmed their citizens prior to installing their murderous regimes. At the beginning of our own nation’s revolution, one of the first moves made by the British government was an attempt to disarm our citizens. When our Founding Fathers ensured that the Second Amendment was made a part of our Constitution, they were not just wasting ink. They were acting to ensure our present security was never forcibly endangered by tyrants, foreign or domestic.”

But school shootings are horrible and need to be addressed, they write.

“First, it is important that we recognize that this is not a gun control problem; it is a complex sociological problem. No single course of action will solve the problem.”

The military veterans say local schools should make their own decisions and plans.

“Most recently the Cleburne Independent School District will become the first district in North Texas to consider allowing some teachers to carry concealed guns. We do not opine as to the appropriateness of this decision, but we do support their right to make this decision for themselves.”

Further, those individuals with diagnosed conditions that impact their ability to make decisions can be addressed with programs of treatment.

“In each of these mass shooting incidents the perpetrator was mentally unstable,” the Green Berets says

Firearms safety programs in schools could help, and a repeal of laws making them gun-free zones should be considered by local officials.

Also, the violence in video games needs to be addressed.

“”War and war-like behavior should not be glorified. Hollywood and video game producers are exploiting something they know nothing about. General Sherman famously said, ‘War is hell!’ Leave war to the professionals,’” the letter says

“This is our country, these are our rights. We believe that it is time that we take personal responsibility for our choices and actions rather than abdicate that responsibility to someone else under the illusion that we have done something that will make us all safer. We have a responsibility to stand by our principles and act in accordance with them. Our children are watching and they will follow the example we set,” they write.

Full article here.