Thursday, April 24, 2014

Tomorrow, April 25, 2014... Will it be another day of infamy?

The case is not only draconian in its presentation, it also hints of insanity by virtue of its logic…which is not logical in the least!   A right that shall not be infringed is what it is, nothing more nothing less.  The fact that the state of New Jersey even considered whether or not a person has a right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense and then to prove a 'justifiable need' for doing so" borders on insanity by those doing the considering.  They are insinuating that one will never have to defend one’s self outside the home and that the self defense necessity will occur only in the home.  How crazy is that?  And to prove a justifiable need for  self defense is like saying, “I will know ahead of time when I’m about to be assaulted.”
The draconian part ( harsh, severe, strict, extreme, drastic, stringent, tough, cruel, oppressive, ruthless, relentless, punitive, authoritarian, despotic, tyrannical, and repressive) is the fact that it is being considered by the United States Supreme Court…take another look at those synonyms, a group of people went to war over less…and they won!  That was back in 1776 or there about.  ~  Norman E. Hooben

Source for the following: JPFO
Whatever Supreme Court decides in gun carry case, infringements will continue
By David Codrea
Gun owners who monitor such things are on pins and needles after the Supreme Court apparently (temporarily?) kicked the can down the road in Drake v. Jerejian, a New Jersey case considering "Whether the Second Amendment secures a right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense; and ... whether state officials violate the Second Amendment by requiring that individuals wishing to exercise their right to carry a handgun for self-defense first prove a 'justifiable need' for doing so."

"The U.S. Supreme Court has pushed its consideration of a case challenging New Jersey's mandate ... to April 25," The Washington Times reported, further explaining plaintiff "Drake applied for a handgun permit from New Jersey in 2010 but was rejected ..."

The Counsel of record for the case is Alan Gura, of Hellerand McDonald fame.

Gura has argued that four federal district courts, along with several state supreme courts, have ruled that the Second Amendment extends the right to carry handguns to outside of the home for self-defense, while several other federal courts have disagreed," the National Constitution Center explained. Such conflicts among the lower courts would seem to make the case a natural for SCOTUS consideration, and seasoned pro-RKBA court watchers are as cautiously hopeful as they can be.

"[T]he case has been relisted for next Friday," New Jersey gun law expert, attorney and author Evan Nappen told his Facebook followers about the delay. "This is a potentially positive sign. It got past round one."

"Conferences are entirely private, so we can't know what went on," author and attorney David T. Hardy weighed in on his Arms and the Law blog. "I can think of several possibilities. Most obviously, perhaps some Justices wanted longer to think it over. A good sign. Or perhaps they wanted to see what would happen in the Ninth Circuit -- will California be allowed to intervene, which might mean a petition for cert.? There really is no way to say, although either of these possibilities mean the Court is giving it serious consideration."

Will the court have enough judges lined up to grant certiorari?
"Each year the Justices and their law clerks review anywhere between 8 to 10 thousand petitions that come to Court – each one of them hoping that the Court will agree to hear their case at oral argument," C-SPAN advises in an introduction to a video explaining the process. "Of these thousands, only 80-100 get heard during a term."

And if they do hear the case, how will they decide?

Can we count on "conservative" Chief Justice John Roberts, who inexplicably found the approval of the Framers in Obamacare?

Will "conservative" Justice Antonin Scalia once again give aid and comfort to "progressive" gun-grabbers, as he did in Heller? What prompted him to volunteer the unnecessary (not to mention subversive) opinion "We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of 'dangerous and unusual weapons.'"?

Will "conservative" Justice Clarence Thomas let all gun owners down, the way he did Thomas Lamar Bean, when he decided it was totally OK for the fedgov to create a prohibited person out of a good citizen who inadvertently had some ammunition in his car when he visited Mexico after attending a gun show?
While different legal minds and "informed" court-watchers are nattering on about judicial review, and whether intermediate or strict scrutiny should apply (and perhaps even contesting how many angels can dance on the head of a pin), what the High Court will not address, should they elect to hear the case, are the clear words those of us, without robes and law degrees and political connections with attendant obligations, understand instinctively:
"... shall not be infringed."

"[I]f they accept either Seegars or Parker, I believe the court will not dare say there is no individual rkba," I noted back in 2005. "But if they find there is one, it will be so heavily burdened with 'reasonable restrictions' as to ensure the status quo. They'll never admit the truth unless someone, that would be us, has enough power to compel them."

They won't because there's no "or else" attached to a demand.

Perhaps the Court will hear Drake. Perhaps it will even decide in favor of "shall issue" permits, and the gun groups can all tell us what a great victory it is for "gun rights," and inarguably, it will be a definite incremental advance in the direction of more people going about while armed.

Still, it's hard to square government permissions to bear arms with the express proscription that they really have no legitimate authority, legal, moral or otherwise, to have any say in the matter, that is, until such time as someone abuses the right and victimizes another by threat or action. And no matter what the Black Robes say, you can bet it will be a far cry from an admission that no permits should be needed because no one in government has the delegated power to require them, and those who say they do are frauds and usurpers.

Somehow, a quote from Thomas Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow" comes to mind:

"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."

David Codrea is a field editor at GUNS Magazine, penning their monthly "Rights Watch" column. He provides regular reporting and commentary at Gun Rights Examinerand blogs at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.


The Hypocrisy Of ObamaCare, Who crafted the ObamaCare deception?

The message says one thing, the law says another:
The core message: “Reform requires that Members of Congress get their healthcare coverage from the same plans as millions of Americans.”
However, the Affordable Care Act actually locks lawmakers and their staffers out of the federal government’s group health plan and instead puts them into state insurance exchanges.
Source:  Tea Party Command Center
Chavez-linked group crafted 'keep your health plan'
Research developed by imaging guru for Venezuelan dictator
by Aaron Klein
A little-known group called the Herndon Alliance has been the driving force in branding Obamacare to the public.
It was this group that advised President Obama to say Americans can maintain their choice of doctors and insurers under his health-care plan, WND has learned.
The Herndon Alliance is openly partnered with a number of radical groups, including MoveOn, the National Council of La Raza and a slew of George Soros-funded activist organizations.
It is also partnered with a “direct action” group dedicated to the teachings of radical Saul Alinsky.
Behind Obamacare since beginning
The Herndon Alliance has been behind the marketing campaign for Obamacare since the inception of the legislation.
Herndon is “the most influential group in the health arena that the public has never heard of,” reported Politico in 2009.
Politico reported that when Obama repeatedly announced Americans can maintain their “choice” of doctors and insurance plans, “he is using a Herndon strategy for wringing fear out of a system overhaul.”
Controversial pollster, contraceptives
The research component of the Herndon Alliance is provided by Celinda Lake, who teamed up with a marketing research firm, American Environics. AE uses social-values surveys to gauge public opinion.
Lake was commissioned recently by Enroll America to determine how best to market the Obamacare enrolment campaign to the public.
Lake’s survey found that even with tax credits and federal subsidies, those without insurance still considered the cost of Obamacare too heavy.
She recommended Enroll America not cite any specific dollar amounts when trying to convince the uninsured to sign up.
Lake’s firm, together with Herndon, was one of the driving forces behind the progressive strategy to use contraception as an election issue in 2012.
According to Lake’s website, her company conducted polling on the contraception issue in conjunction with an organization called the Communications Consortium Media Center, or CCMC, and the Herndon Alliance.
Lake’s research on voters attitudes on contraception found Roman Catholic voters tend to mirror voters overall when it comes to reproductive health-care services that the Affordable Care Act will cover.
Lake’s website said: “Not only are Catholics favorable to including birth control or contraception in insurance coverage, these inclusions also make them more favorable toward the Affordable Care Act.”
Chavez guru
Herndon’s decision-making for how to market Obamacare was based significantly on the theoretical work of American Environics, which was founded in 2004 by a team of American strategists and Canadian researchers.
AE describes itself as a consulting firm that uses social-values surveys, cognitive linguistics and political psychology to help foundations and nonprofits develop breakthrough social change initiatives.

Deception: Here's who crafted Obamacare's magic lies

Radicals' poll-tested language soothed fears of nation
by Klein About
Editor’s note: This is the second WND report investigating the Herndon Alliance, the group behind the marketing of Obamacare. The first article, which exposed Herndon’s ties to many radical groups, can be read here.
A group that has been the driving force in branding Obamacare has recommended a series of phrases, some deceptive, that the White House and Democrats have used to sell the health-care law to the public, WND has found.
The little-known Herndon Alliance has been behind the marketing of Obamacare since the inception of the legislation.
It was the group that crafted President Obama’s false claim that Americans can maintain their “choice” of doctors and insurance plans.
Along with advising the Obama administration, Herndon has been providing strategy to Enroll America, the main organization pushing for the uninsured to sign up for Obamacare. Enroll America’s executive director, Ron Pollack, was a founding member of Herndon.
The Herndon Alliance is “the most influential group in the health arena that the public has never heard of,” reported Politico in 2009.
Politico reported that when Obama repeatedly announced Americans can maintain their “choice” of doctors and insurance plans, he was “using a Herndon strategy for wringing fear out of a system overhaul.”
The Herndon Alliance, based in Seattle, describes itself as “a nationwide non-partisan coalition of more than 200 minority, faith, labor, advocacy, business, and healthcare provider organizations.”
As WND reported in February 2012, the group received a grant from the lobbying arm of the progressive Media Matters for America to help the White House to craft and market Obamacare.
Using polling data about what Americans like and don’t like about Obamacare, Herndon concocted a list of words and statements to use in selling the legislation to the country.
Herndon recommended avoiding the following terminology: “Universal health care,” “Canadian Style Health care,” “Medicare for All,” “Competition,” “Government health care for all,” “Regulations,” “Required,” “Public or Government health care,” and “Basic health care.”
Key phrases to use in the messaging of Obamacare include “Quality affordable health care,” “American solutions,” “A choice of private and public plans,” “Choice and control,” “Giving security and peace of mind,” “Sliding scale, pay what you can afford,” “Government as a watchdog, ensure a fair playing field,” “Affordable health plans” and “Smart investments.”
Many of these phrases were incorporated in the marketing material released by the White House and groups like Enroll America.
Herndon specifically labels women, particularly those over the age of 65, “a key persuadable audience.”
“We need to show them how the new law will benefit them. Remember that when messaging to women, start with our core message to build trust,” continues Herndon.
The core message: “Reform requires that Members of Congress get their healthcare coverage from the same plans as millions of Americans.”
However, the Affordable Care Act actually locks lawmakers and their staffers out of the federal government’s group health plan and instead puts them into state insurance exchanges.
Herndon recognized the public was finding it difficult to accept Obamacare will bring health-care costs down.
So to avoid a conversation on costs, Herndon suggested what it called a “long-term effort to ‘move’ the public along by focusing the conversation on specific benefits of the law that will most affect them.”
On Medicare, Herndon concocted two key selling points: “The law protects Medicare and provides preventive care with no co-pay.”
Aaron Klein’s “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office” is available, autographed, at WND’s Superstore

Saturday, April 19, 2014

Custom Made Weaponry... What will Obama say? Will Eric Holder sue? Will Diane Feinstein have a fit?

With the Obama regime buying up most of the commercially produced ammunition (see Feds Buy Two Billion Rounds of Ammunition) making it difficult for the average citizen to not only protect themselves in emergency situations but for legitimate hunting and sporting events. Never before in the history of our nation has the federal government pursued actions that hamper the ability of ordinary citizens to fulfill their Constitutionally protected obligations to bear arms.  It is already known that many law abiding citizens have taken up the practice of loading or re-loading their own ammunition, so it stands to reason that making one's own weaponry would soon follow...especially with a hostile government breathing down or backs.  Apparently there's already someone jumping on the potentially profitable enterprise of manufacturing specialty weaponry, in my humble opinion, to counter the threat the Obama regime has on the citizenry.  Whether or not Sons of Guns of Baton Rouge, Louisiana has that in mind remains to be seen but as an outsider reading between the lines its certainly a potential objective. ~ Norman E. Hooben

Red Jacket Firearms – Sons of Guns
A new Discovery Channel program, Sons of Guns, is going to follow a Baton Rouge, Louisiana firm, Red Jacket Firearms, as it manufactures custom made weaponry for sale throughout the nation.
The company is owned and operated by Will Hayden. The show will feature him, his daughter Stephanie, who is the office manager, and his diverse crew as they create and amplify weaponry for private collectors, the military and different police forces. The first episode was about a customer who saw a shotgun with a silencer in a film and wanted RJF to create one for him.

The history of RJF is one of many successful small businesses. The business began as a retail firearms shop that also had a firing range. They decided to custom-make their own firearms, but didn’t have enough money to market their products. So they went to gun shows, where they found their marketing niche and developed a regional reputation, which eventually grew into a nationally known enterprise. To this day, Hayden continues to go to gun forums; now, he mainly provides advise on how to solve problems with firearms.
The first season, which took about a year and a half to film, includes 12 different episodes. Originally, the producers of the program intended it to follow in the model of American Choppers, which is dominated by the interactions between a father and his two sons. Usually, at least in the episodes I’ve seen of AC, the dad and at least one of the sons argue throughout the hour, but miraculously create a modified bike. However, the producers of Sons of Guns had to modify their intentions when Hayden and his crew got along. So this program will actually feature gun-making and the skills that are needed in order to do a quality job.
Sons of Guns – Scorpion Strikes
In last night′s episode of Sons of Guns, Scorpion Strikes, we have more fun and drama courtesy of the Discovery Channel. More office drama as Kris and Stephanie Ford become more disgruntled with their new CEO, Joe. Will finally visits the building Joe bought and is far from pleased. The two weekly ′builds′ are the refurbishing of a UK recon tank, an FV101 Scorpion, and a cute, little handgun from the late 19th Century known as a ′Velo Dog′. We even had another visit with Flem and Vince! Of course, there was also the obligatory staged explosions, too. Never gets old to some, does it?
Will and Joe test the FV101 Scorpion tank for a client. Image Credit: Discovery Communications.
The show begins with Will getting his first look at the building Joe purchased. The clock is ticking on Red Jacket Firearms′ lease and they must soon vacate the premises. So Joe bought a building out of his own pocket and is ready for Will to sign a lease agreement with him. Don′t count your chickens before they hatch, Joe. Will does not like the new building. Much work will be required and money to fund the project. Joe has already priced the air conditioning system to the tune of $60,000. Will refuses to commit immediately to leasing the premises. Kris Ford interrupts them with news that there′s a tank at Red Jacket!
A former client, Malcolm, whom RJF built a ′truck cannon′ for is back, this time with a surplus FV101 Scorpion recon tank. Malcolm wants Red Jacket to refurbish it so he can flip the tank for cash. Naturally, Joe is not happy as the company lost money with Malcolm′s other project, but Will and Kris are like two kids at a candy store. Even though this candy store has a round jammed in the barrel! Beyond that ′minor′ problem, the tank also has several major mechanical issues, like only being able to go in reverse.
Joe manages to get the tank into the shop′s garage. Will calls on Ira, an expert in artillery, as well as Flem, to help with the project. Meanwhile, Kris wraps up his work and is calling an early end to the day by taking the production line team out for drinks. Joe asks him to use the time clock to punch out. Kris refuses as he is on salary. Joe explains that workman comp laws requires that even the time for salary employees must be accounted for. Kris ignores him and walks out.
Flem arrives with a pry-bar to remove the shell casing from the Scorpion′s 76mm breech. Once this is done, Flem and Will carefully push the round out the back of the barrel. At first, they think the round is live, as it appears to have some sort of timer detonator. Will orders everyone out of the building as he unscrews it from the shell. Turns out that its a fake! Just something to look real.
A customer, Troy, arrives with a small handgun he wants repaired. Charlie recognizes it as a Velo Dog, a pistol that bicyclers used in the late 19th Century to shoot at dogs threatening to topple the rider from his ′Penny Farthing′. Ira arrives to help on the Scorpion. They first free up the rusty clutch linkages so the tank can now be driven forward as well as reverse. The next problem is with the gun′s recoil system. Flem tells Will that the gun is ′in battery′, but the recoil hydraulics are frozen.
Vince calls Joe about committing to their joint venture, but Joe refuses to do so. Joe wants to know everything , first. Joe then gets in Stephanie′s face over the Velo Dog gun. Joe says they′re losing money with the job. Stephanie defends the job since gunsmithing is what started the company. Joe says now is the time to grow the company.
Charlie tells Stephanie that the firing pin on the Velo Dog is very delicate and tricky. Also, ammunition is an issue, as the pistol uses 6mm rimfire cartridges. He thinks that the Winchester 22 rimfire will work, but its hard to come by, too. Stephanie finds one box of ammo through her contacts. Troy arrives and Charlie show him the work done. But the first test fire attempt fails and Charlie has to adjust the firing pin some more. Troy fires one shot and is happy. Less than happy is Kris, who vents his displeasure about Joe to Flem. Will overhears this as Stephanie tells her husband to not talk about it in the building.
Ira and Flem get the Scorpion′s recoil system working again. The next problem is the turret′s power drive. They can still turn the turret manually, but the electric drive is jacked up. Will talks with Kris about the changes at the company and advises him to roll with the punches and get a hobby. He doesn′t want Kris to dwell on work when at home. Will then takes the Scorpion out with Joe driving it. They think they have all of the mechanical issues solved.
The next morning, Malcolm joins the gang at the test range as Will and Ira pull up in the Scorpion. As they line up to shoot, the turret power gets jammed, forcing Will to go manual. But after that, they fire the gun three times, blowing up targets enhanced with explosives. Vince stops by to show Joe the paperwork on the arms deal he′s working on. He confronts Joe about feedback Vince has been getting from his contacts, whom are telling Vince that Joe is trying to buy the whole shipment for Red Jacket. Joe denies the rumors. So we′ll see if this deal goes through. So ends this week′s episode of Sons of Guns, Scorpion Strike.