Monday, July 6, 2009

Innocents Betrayed-Gun Control History




In light of all that is going on in America today and in other parts of the world Iran for example this is a must watch video. Thankfully the people of Honduras have an honorable Military who ousted their would be Dictator who the obamageddon supports (talk about a world gone mad!) and I having served would like to think that our own Military would behave honorably as well however in perilous times and with Nazi Napolitano in charge having labeled Veterans and citizens opposing the tax and spend policies or illegal aliens as terrorists and not knowing what information they may be given it behooves us all to have a weaponized citizenry. Control the Weapons - control the people. Control the Food - Control the people.

Led by an articulate orator, the German government set out to nationalize health care, transportation, manufacturing and law enforcement. TheObama government has set out to nationalize manufacturing of autos and the finance industry. The Obama-backed "cap and trade" legislation will effectively nationalize the energy and transportation industries. And Obama's nationalized health care program is on the front burner.

Now here's another similarity: nationalization of law enforcement. H.R. 675, sponsored by Democrat Rep. Bob Filner, was introduced to:

Provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. (Emphasis added.)

Why do employees of the Department of Defense need the authority to execute warrants, make arrests and carry firearms? When the bill was introduced, Filner said: "We need to ensure that federal, state and local law enforcement are able to work together to apprehend criminals and to prevent and solve crimes."

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act explicitly prohibits the Department of Defense from involvement in state and local law enforcement activities. The feds have the FBI to investigate federal crimes and the Justice Department to prosecute federal crimes. Waco and Ruby Ridge are good examples of federal law enforcement. And the land management agencies have gun-totin' enforcement officers to prevent tourists from picking up arrowheads on federal property. Why do we need to authorize the secretary of defense to arm another domestic police force?

Take a clue from the authorities granted by the bill:

  • To execute and serve warrants;
  • To make arrests without warrants;
  • To carry firearms;
  • To enforce federal laws enacted to protect persons or property;
  • To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies. …

There are other authorities, but let's focus on this last one: "To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies." What is an unlawful assembly? Any assembly that is not authorized by government is unlawful. Should an irate society decide to hold a tea party even if government refused to authorize it, then there must be a reliable federal law enforcement army to "suppress" the unlawful assembly. Local police cannot be trusted to "suppress" an assembly of their neighbors. Finish reading...



Part 2 - Part 6

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Lori,

Just encountered your "Lori's Latest" site via a search for 'Innocents Betrayed - . . .'
I saw some discussion that strikes a chord, and some links that I'll be checking out shortly.
Just wanted to say thanks for for the subjects you appear to have looked into, and the comments you've put out there for others to consider.
I was particularly intrigued by your avatar (?) about the second amendment. I think I'll do a little digging to see if I can find who originally said (or wrote) it.
Let you now what I find

Las Vegas