Article written by David Risselada
Earlier this week, the news broke that the NICS background check had failed and human error allowed Dylan Roof to purchase a handgun when in fact, he should not have been able too. Apparently, there was some trouble accessing some paper work concerning a drug arrest. Federal law states that any back ground check not completed within three days can be treated as a “proceed with sale.” For many of us who purchase firearms the legal way we know that sometimes it is possible for the sale to be put on “hold” simply because the FBI may have come across something that has the slightest relevance to your name. The more information you give about yourself of course, the less likely this is to occur; however, even if it does, the FBI generally clears up the misunderstanding. If they fail to do so within the specified time frame, the dealer may proceed with the sale, or chose to deny. It is likely, if dealing with repeat customers that have no problems, that they will complete the transaction. There is nothing inherently wrong with this system except for the fact that it is unconstitutional and it has done absolutely nothing to prevent criminals from acquiring firearms illegally. In fact, the only thing it has done is prepare the groundwork for back door gun registration as your info along with the weapon type and serial number are now on paper every time you complete one. Shall not be infringed indeed.
Many gun right enthusiasts see this as a victory of sorts. A situation in which gun control initiatives failed to prevent a crime and a “bad guy” was able to get a gun despite the efforts of over intrusive government. It is certainly no victory to see anyone harmed in criminal activity, please do not misunderstand my meaning. Many of us on the right are fighting tooth and nail to get people to see the truth about the failures of gun control. This is a misguided approach because many of us also don’t understand the real game being played here. The left simply cannot be reasoned with, nor do they want to be.
Many seem to think that we are playing a game of facts with people who truly have everyone’s best interest at heart, and will be willing to adjust their thinking when presented with hard evidence of their failures. This is not the case at all. Failure is a friend of the left because every system that is broken or ineffective in preventing “gun violence” only advances their agenda. In other words, the left knows that the back ground check system doesn’t prevent criminals from getting guns; in fact, they are counting on it. This is a subtle application of the Hegelian Dialectic, the Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis formula. In other words, the left uses the fact that the thousands of gun laws on the books, including the back ground check, are ineffective so they can continue to drive their agenda towards total confiscation on the grounds that all of their “other solutions” have been ineffective. They literally need the masses to see no other alternative than to accept their solutions out of the false notion that everything has become completely hopeless. To illustrate this point further consider the following quote. One I use quite often to make this point.
“Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future.”Fyodor Dostoevsky
That quote is found in Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and is the best explanation available as to what we are witnessing in our country. The whole agenda revolves around creating a sense of helplessness and conditioning people to believe that something better (communism) waits right around the corner. When it comes to gun violence the more they can present the idea that it is the average guy who just goes nuts and kills a bunch of people, the better, especially if they had passed the back ground check. More and more you see this narrative developing. A shooter who had legally purchased his weapon because he passed the back ground check. They are not going to move the agenda by focusing on the real problems of too many unenforceable laws, and the number of people killed in cities with strict gun control.They are not going to acknowledge their failures unless it helps push the narrative further to the left.
The good news is that people are not as stupid as the left believes they are. Liberals assume that most people can be brainwashed and manipulated. (I suppose they feel that way because many of them have been.) As is usually the case, the efforts to create a wave of anti-gun hysteria have once again back fired. June saw the highest numbers of gun sales with a spike of 10.1% compared to last June. It isn’t uncommon at all for firearm sales to spike when a mass shooting occurs because everybody is smart enough to figure out that only a good guy with a gun will stop a bad guy with a gun. If that isn’t true than why do unarmed people call the police?
To learn more about the Marxist agenda and communist indoctrination check out my book “Not on my watch: Exposing the Marxist agenda in education.”
This article first appeared on RadicalConservativerisso.blogspot.com
IT’S A SLIPPERY SLOPE…
Anti-gun advocates rarely use logic and reasoning to walk through until the end the idea of banning guns, ammunition, etc. Where does the absurdity end? Well, we must only look across the pond to our friends in the UK to see the eventual long-term result because it doesn’t end with guns. The picture below is called a Knife Surrender Bin. The government is encouraging people to surrender their knives by depositing their knives in them. This is no joke…look it up yourself. Additionally, it’s illegal for a store to sell kitchen knives and cutlery to anyone under 18 years of age.
When a married woman is murdered in her home the first suspect is usually the husband. If your child is caught with their hand in the cookie jar over and over, but tell you they didn’t eat the cookies you probably aren’t going to believe them when the cookies come up missing. With the Charleston shooting, and other events, shouldn’t the government be the first suspect? The government has been caught lying on a daily basis. The Vietnam War for the United States was started on a lie with the Gulf of Tonkin incident. This inconvenient truth killed more than 50,000 American soldiers. My point of all of this is the ruling elite will commit any atrocity to push their agenda. Fast and Furious was a gun walking operation that let weapons get into the hands of drug cartels so the second amendment could be blamed. Guess who ran this operation? If you guessed that Holder ran Department of Justice, you guessed correctly. This has been the direct and indirect cause of thousands of deaths.These are examples of false flags that have been used to push and steer an agenda.
Ted Kaczynski aka The Unabomber was a product of a CIA program called MK Ultra. James Holmes, the Aurora Batman shooter was a patient of Air Force Pentagon trained psychiatrist Dr. Fenton. Timothy McVeigh was visited several times by Dr. Jolyon West who was part of a circle of psychiatrist’s that worked for the CIA in mind control for years. Aaron Alexis the Naval yard shooter contacted the police and a mind control support group stating he was being targeted by low frequencies that where putting voices into his head. He even carved ELF(Extra Low Frequencies) into his weapon.The Pentagon has been working for years to put voices into people’s heads through lasers and frequencies. If entities within our government have been involved with mind control projects for years involving killers, we should look at this event as another possibility.
Even if Roof wasn’t under mind control or had some gov. handler, he was on psychotropic drugs. Drugs.com pyschiatric side affects could be anxiety, depression,abnormal thinking, depersonalization,irritability, hallucination, attempted suicide and more. All of the recent mass killers have had this in common that where all on one of these drugs that change your mental stability. The mass media will not concentrate on this because their biggest sponsors is big pharma.
We should all question the timing of this latest event and is healthy for us to do so. The media has been trying to drum up a race war since last year. Then the immediate roll out of demonizing the 2nd amendment from the establishment of both parties. Karl Rove a republican strategist, fox news contributor and “2nd amendment” supporter said that we should repeal the 2nd amendment.
Now the media is loosely trying to tie Rand Paul and other presidential candidates to Roof because they have received donations from the Council of Conservative Citizens. A white nationalist group that Roof wrote about in his memoirs. This is interesting considering Paul, Cruz and the rest of republican candidates have close ties to Aipac and Israel. White supremacy groups hate Jews more than any other groups, so this doesn’t pass the smell test either.
Roof is 21 years old and his face book page was just started a couple of months ago, which he had black friends on his list. If he was this giant racist why would he have black friends on his list.
Last Thursday Rev. Clenard Childress from Blackgenocide.org. said he believed Roof had handlers or accomplices in the shooting. That there is no way a drugged out 21 yr old would figure out to do this right before June teenth and other events that where about to take place in the black community without help. The media rolled out his room mate who said he had been planning this for up to 6 months. If this is true wouldn’t his room mate be considered an accomplice.
This whole thing smelled bad from the beginning. If our government will kill buffalo to control the Indians all bets are off and will stop at nothing to ram through their agenda. Anything goes. They need the masses divided because if the people are separated they can rule over us, but if we can unite then we can take the world back. The ruling class needs us disarmed and they keep pecking away at the second amendment piece by piece. Remember the media was taken over in the late 40’s and 50’s with operation mockingbird when the CIA put editors and publishers in power at every major media outlet. Question everything and believe nothing.
WAKE UP AND RESIST DAILY OR BECOME A SLAVE!!!!!!!!!
“It is the purpose of this Act to provide impetus toward this goal by creating a new agency of peace to deal with the problem of reduction and control of armaments looking toward ultimate world disarmament,” the law states.
Section 2 states: “This organization must have the capacity to provide the essential scientific, economic, political, military, psychological, and technological information upon which realistic arms control and disarmament policy must be based.” One of the primary functions it must be able to carry out is, “The dissemination and coordination of public information concerning arms control and disarmament.”
This sounds like an infowar waged against the American mindset as then U.S. Attorney Eric Holder in 1995 announcing a public campaign to “really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.
Section 3: “Arms” and Disarmaments” meaning, “the identification, verification, inspection, limitation, control, reduction, or elimination, of armed forces and armaments of all kinds under international agreement including the necessary steps taken under such an agreement to establish an effective sytem of inter-national control, or to create and strengthen international organizations for the maintenance of peace.”
We are obviously talking about an all out hardcore global take over here. The director of this agency shall be appointed by the President and act as primary advisor to Secretary of State and the President in regards to arms disarmament matters and shall have supreme responsibility for overall functions of the agency having assistance from an entire organization of committees, advisors, deputy director, bureaus, divisions, offices, etc, whom shall have required meetings with the President, Secretary of State, and the Director of Arms and Disarmament Agency.
Now by The Arms Control and Disarmament Act, we are not just alluding to gun confiscations of individual citizens but entire disarmament of entire national military capabilities! According to Title III-Functions, section 31, the Act states,
The authority of the Director with respect to research, development,and other studies shall be limited to participation in the following in so far as they relate to arms control and disarmament:
Since public law 87-297 was enacted, just about every president has worked to enact its provisions, including President Obama who signed a U.N. arms trade treaty which was rejected by the Senate.
“The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by [Article 2] of the Arms Trade Treaty,” wrote Joe Wolverton II of the New American. “Article 3 places the ‘ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2′ within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.”
Washington Examiner-A top police representative on Tuesday said that there is no history of criminals using a round popular among AR-15 rifle shooters against officers, undermining the Obama administration’s argument for banning the 5.56 M855 “lightgreen tip.”
“Any ammunition is of concern to police in the wrong hands, but this specific round has historically not posed a law enforcement problem,” said James Pasco, executive director of the Washington office of the Fraternal Order of Police, the world’s largest organization of sworn law enforcement officers, with more than 325,000 members.
He told Secrets that the round used mostly for target practice “is not typically used against law enforcement.”
While he said that he is “not finding fault” with the surprise move last month by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to classify the round as “armor piercing” and then ban it, Pasco added, “While this round will penetrate soft body armor, it has not historically posed a threat to law enforcement.”
That view not only counters BATFE’s reason for proposing the ban, it also challenges the White House endorsement of the ban. Spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday, “we are looking at additional ways to protect our brave men and women in law enforcement and believe that this process is valuable for that reason alone. This seems to be an area where everyone should agree that if there are armor-piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerably more risk.”
The administration’s effort is under fire on Capitol Hill where 55 percent of all House members have signed a letter challenging BATFE’s proposal.
Led by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte and the National Rifle Association, 235 members have signed the letter. The signatures came in at a record pace since Goodlatte’s team and the NRA have been circulating it for just three business days.
A similar effort is moving quickly through the Senate, led by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley.
As with most rounds used in rifles, the 5.56 M855 will shoot through soft body armor, but was granted an exemption to longstanding police protection legislation because it isn’t used by criminals who typically use smaller pistols.
BATFE said that with the popularity of AR-style pistols growing, the weapon poses a new threat to police. But foes of the bullet ban say that criminals are unlikely to spend the $1,000 or more to by one and also that at about 20 inches long, it isn’t considered a concealed weapon.
Many gun enthusiasts believe that the proposed bullet ban, up for public comment, is a backdoor bid to cut the popularity of the AR-15, the nation’s most popular gun, one critics call an “assault weapon” and a target of liberals and President Obama.
Sheriff Richard Mack, the head of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, has recently said he would gladly debate sheriff Normand on his interpretation of the Constitution and the role of the Sheriff. Richard Mack, former sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, was the first in the country to file a lawsuit against the Clinton administration to stop the intrusiveness associated with the Brady Bill. Mack’s case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court where he won a landmark decision on the issue of states’ rights and local sovereignty.
This challenge came about after I asked sheriff Normand what he thought of sheriff Mack’s book ‘County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope’. First off, I recommend everyone read this book. Sheriff Normand told me that Mack “Was all wet (on the Constitution)”. I proceeded to ask Normand what that meant and he said, “He’s got it all wrong. He’s all wrong on the Constitution”. Looking up the interpretation of the phrase “all wet”, I discovered it referred to being drunk. Upon hearing these comments, Mack offered the opportunity to debate sheriff Normand on the meaning and interpretation of the Constitution. Normand is a lawyer, I would think this would be well within his comfort zone. Mack would love to fly in anytime and debate these issues. So, the challenge stands. Sheriff Normand, shoot me an email and let me know when we can set this up.
While attending the JPSO Citizen’s Academy, I realized that Sheriff Newell Normand was sounding a lot like the Department of Homeland security. What seems to be a predetermined narrative pushed onto us by various government agencies, has now trickled down to our local sheriff. Newell Normand told us that the dismantling of Al-Qaeda is no longer “Core AQ”,our primary terrorist threat, and that now “we” are looking at more homegrown levels of terrorism.
Below is a transcript of my address to the Citizen’s Academy and the Sheriff’s response:
JPSO CITIZENS ACADEMY TRANSCRIPT MAY 20, 2014
Sheriff, I could not imagine a more professional organization associated with law enforcement than yours. Your staff, equipment and facilities are extremely impressive and something the residents of this parish should be proud of. I also believe that your department is made up of good men and women who do their job with empathy and common sense.
With that said, my concerns are not with your department but with the government source that is providing our parish with millions of dollars. There is a funny saying that you may have heard “There is always free cheese in a mouse trap”. I ask that you be wary not of the equipment that the parish is given but of the vernacular that this agency and or branch of government is using and now you, yourself are repeating. You have mentioned that the war on terror is now focused inward here, “on the homeland”.
A Fox News affiliate reported that Sgt. Dan Downing of the Morgan County Sheriff’s Department in Indiana admits that the increasing militarization of domestic police departments is intended partially to deal with returning veterans who are now being seen as homegrown terror threats. He went on to say that returning veterans have the ability and knowledge to build IED’s and defeat law enforcement techniques.
In April 2009, the DHS intelligence assessment listed returning veterans as likely domestic terrorists. Just a month later, the New York Times reported on how Boy Scout Explorers were being trained by the DHS to kill “disgruntled Iraq war veterans” in terrorist drills. The FBI has also repeatedly characterized returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as a major domestic terror threat. We shouldn’t be treating our veterans this way.
Keep in mind, while making these inflammatory statements the federal government is also doing the following:
–funding Al-Qaeda in Syria with anti-tank weaponry, small arms, and telecommunications (Washington Times);
–releasing over 36,000 illegal immigrants who had nearly 88,000 convictions – including 193 homicides, 423 sexual assaults, 300 kidnappings, and 1,100 aggravated assaults (Breitbart),
–spying on every American’s emails, text messages, credit card statements, and phone calls.
–Arming the United States Postal service, department of Agriculture, IRS, Social security administration and many other agencies.
Sheriff, the list goes on and on.
I hope that we can all ask ourselves what is happening. The hypocrisy and dangerous rhetoric of the federal government is at an all-time high, Obama and George Bush are both to blame for these policies.
We have participated in this citizen’s academy because we care about our community and our families. I wish we had the luxury to sit back and say nothing, but for myself I have three children and cannot afford that luxury. So when President Obama said he wanted to build a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded as our military, he meant it. This is the Department of Homeland Security which has purchased over 2.5 billion of rounds of ammunition and has supplied law enforcement agencies across this country with millions of dollars’ worth of equipment.
The Vietnam War was based on the Gulf of Tonkin false flag lie and the Iraq war was based on the lie of weapons of mass destruction. Now the federal government appears to be preparing for hostility with the American people. I want you and everyone else to know what a false flag is so that when something terrible does happen the American people won’t fall for another lie and be herded into another fear fueled war with each other.
Last time we met you told me that if a man pulled out a gun and robbed me, he could be considered a terrorist. I don’t believe we need to live in a manufactured state of fear created by our federal government so that we stand by and watch our bill of rights destroyed. I ask that you uphold your oath to the constitution and protect our individual rights. In addition, I ask that you stand with the American people of this parish and help us not to be divided by issues or racism or intolerance. In order to protect the community, we must uphold the rights of the smallest minority – which is the individual — and not sacrifice those rights for the collective or what is deemed as the benefit of the group.
War is a racket fought for special interests and corporations and THIS ONE THE FEDS ARE PREPARING IS NO DIFFERENT. If you don’t believe me, look up the most decorated Military veteran in History, General Smedly Butler.
Another citizen: What’s your point?
ME: My point was… Uh… It was not a question. It was me just asking you to uphold your oath to the constitution.
Sheriff Normand response: “Well I don’t think that there is any risk of me not doing so. I mean the fact of the matter is this: we have constitutional rights, constitutional protections, those are all worked out in the balance of interest. And you know the fact that we are dealing with domestic terrorism, and the fact that the dismantling of Al-Qaeda is no longer “Core AQ” our primary terrorist threat and that now we are looking at more homegrown levels of terrorism, we can continue to get into a philosophical debate as to who is right and who is wrong, in the interim people are dying. And the fact of the matter the law is being violated
Me:” people are dying here?”
Sheriff: “ We are charged with, making sure we seek those individuals out, and we charge them and they go to jail in order to have a structured and ordered society.
When I get money from the federal government, there is really not any strings attached. It’s a request by me, its not a gift by them. I can dictate in whatever program I desire and the ones I don’t desire I don’t participate in. It doesn’t mean that they are wrong or they are right, in those programs, its just I choose as to what best fits the challenges that I have and the community that I serve. So I think you are under a misunderstanding of that there is significant strings tied to a lot of this money, there is not. In Fact, More often than not we have to prove that we are not going to violate constitutional protections by receiving this money and using it for technology that would be overbearing and over burdensome as related to those constitutional protections.
There is a lot of political rhetoric that is talked about in Washington, I for one don’t really care for Washington politics, I don’t like the divisive nature of it, never have. I don’t like the fact that the party controls national politics. I say this all the time, the two party system is the best and the worst thing about this country. (8:30). It’s a good this because we don’t have plurality, Its easier to reach compromise when we so desire, it’s the worst thing because its all about control. We elect somebody today with a party label, he was a pretty good guy this morning, by this evening about ten o’clock or eight o’clock when the polls close and the results come in he’s a no good rotten bastard. Just because he’s got a different party label than the one we may adhere to. I’m not one that believes that, You know and I’m a Republican, I’m not one that believes that an idea that starts on the democratic side of the isle is a bad idea just because it started on that side of the isle. I’m one that believes we need to look at the (imperical) data (9:23) and determine whether or not, you know, there is any validity to the program, what is it going to accomplish? does it violate the balance of interest as it relates to the constitutional protections? Ah, you know so, I don’t think that there is any risk that I’m going to be one you know to to violate uh uh as it relates to any federal money that’s coming down. In fact to the contrary my experience has been, much different.
You know I tell this little anecdotal story, we work with ATF all the time, and you know how you fill out the FFL form? The Yellow form? A lot of people don’t believe this, but ATF cannot go check the data base of those forms. Unless they have probable cause to determine that there is a violation of some federal statute can they even go run somebody’s name to see what guns they’ve purchased. Neither can I. And they (inaudible won’t/ will) do it at our request. It wasn’t until my career 18, 19 years that I found that out. In fact I thought it was a little disingenuous. Why are we collecting these forms if we can’t go and check what the hell is going on as it relates to that? We can go check about everything else that we have purchased that’s movable. Why all of a sudden, just because there is a second amendment right to keep and bear arms? That’s fine you can the second amendment right to keep and bear arms. It doesn’t mean that there is an onerous impact to that particular right to go and see what arms. In my view that’s not a constitutional protection and I don’t think it’s a significant intrusion.
Ah, when we deal with the mental health issues and primarily what you are talking about and I think you are slanting it a little bit ah we even have a military court here now in Jefferson parish for veterans and dealing with the PTSD issues that they have when they violate… We have set up a whole different structure in criminal violations to help get counseling and everything else that they need if they violate the law, because of their duty, their service, their honor, their loyalty to this country we have put them in a position where they could be mentally incapacitated to some extent and that we have to deal with that. And we recognize that very service by doing so. That’s funded by the federal government. That’s funded by the Obama administration. The fact of the matter is they I mean they stand up and recognize the honor and the duty and the loyalty.
So I mean you know, sometimes we get into this political rhetoric that’s a lot to do about nothing. Ah in my view, ah in an operational sense I don’t see that we are overreaching. Do we make mistakes? Yeah. Do we misspeak? Yeah, but guess what we are human, we’re imperfect. Ah the fact of the matter is, is it fair to take those statement or those happenstances and exploit them? Yeah its unfair, we make mistakes, people make mistakes. Um ya know, we’ve gotten to a point in our society where the impact of the spoken word, because of the internet can permeate across this country and we not only hold, try to hold people to a literal understanding of what they say, we actually take it out of context. And they try to rip one sentence out of a twenty minute speech and try and make something out of it, that its really not. Uh and that’s probably as significant, more significant intrusion on the rights and the liberties of a citizen than most other stuff than we are talking about. Any other questions? (APPLAUSE)
Copyright © 2017