Many here may get the newsletter this came in, but for those who dont this is an excellent civics lesson - one those living in Washington State are well aware of. It is of no consequence how you feel about gay marriage, it is the strategy used that will have impact on us all as this strategy is applied in your local, this time with the bulls eye being applied to your individual rights. Good read! And brings to mind the ancient proverb: The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend. Cant think of a better time to support ANYONE who opposes those bent on taking my rights.
http://www.gunnews.com/liberals-changing-tactics-war-guns/
Liberals Changing Tactics for War on Guns
By Tom Hudson
2014 was a tough year for liberals. They were crushed in the mid-term elections, and many federal judges have been ruling against their irresponsible, anti-constitutional laws and requiring many liberal states and districts to be more in alignment with what the Second Amendment calls for and what other courts have decided.
Most liberals who were tied to Obama lost their elections. Control of both houses of Congress are now under the control of the republicans (this may be good or badonly time will tell). But not all liberal issues have been disasters this year. Liberals were able to get I-594 passed in Washington Statethus implementing universal background checks.
On the gun control front, liberals have taken more hits than they have given. Michael Bloomberg spent millions of dollars in the last election cycle, and his candidates lost big time. The American people spoke quite clearly that the current state of affairs in Washington, as well as state houses across the nation, is unacceptable. The Second Amendment was a crucial component and point of debate throughout the election process.
But dont be lulled into thinking that we have this thing won and that liberals are giving up. Its just the opposite; they are changing their strategy, and this new strategy works. It is battle tested and proven to work. This article will discuss this strategy and how it has worked in the past and how it could work now if we arent careful or if we get complacent.
In 1996, the 104th Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by what was a veto proof margin. President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law, allowing individual states to pass laws preventing same sex marriage. Many states took advantage of this law and enacted laws banning same sex marriage, while some went as far as passing state constitutional amendments. Other states went forward with attempts at passing same sex marriage laws, allowing for gay couples to marry.
Californias now-famous Proposition 8 was an attempt to ban same sex marriage and create a constitutional amendment at the same time. Prop 8 was a ballot measure as required by law. 52.24 percent of voters approved the measure, and Prop 8 became law.
In 1998, the citizens of Hawaii approved a constitutional amendment approving marriage between men and women.
The list goes onUtah, Idaho, Kansas, Floridaall these states approving laws, by a vote of the citizens, to reflect their moral beliefs by banning same sex marriage.
It looked as if this was a lost cause, this view turned out to be far from the truth. Liberals came up with a new strategy, one that made judges defacto legislators. This strategy gave these judges the ability to create law from the bench. These laws were not subject to debate nor veto. Because our legal system is a collection of good old boys and lifetime appointees, it is nearly impossible to get a judge to rule against a fellow jurist. With this knowledge, liberals went about finding the most liberal of these judges and filed their cases in these courts. This judge shopping most assuredly set liberals up for victory and the people of the United States as losers.
Those who opposed gay marriage were labeled homophobes and intolerant, religious zealots. These labels proved to be detrimental to those labeled as such. Some were forced to endure public ridicule and others even lost their jobs as corporations participated in a new form of political correctness bullying.
In the span of about ten years, America went from having almost no states that allowed gay marriage to a nation that requires it be allowed. Even my home state, Utah, now allows gay marriage. I can assure you that this is not the will of the people, but has been forced upon us by a federal judge in Colorado.
Gee Tom, thanks for the heads up. What does this have to do with the Second Amendment? Everything. The liberals won the same sex marriage battle even when they were outnumbered and out funded. They won, even though the will of the people was clear, as manifested by ballot measures.
This strategy is now being used to push gun control legislation. The gay marriage fight has proven that states rights can be negated by legislative judges. The Supreme Court has also declined to get involved in this fight at this point. Even when they do get involved, which they invariably will, I believe that they will rule in favor of gay marriage. This court has been unpredictable at best and isnt necessarily a friend to the gun owner and Second Amendment supporter.
On a federal level, a universal background check law has never been able to gain traction. Very few politicians have been willing to sign their name to such a drastic measure, minus of course the super radical liberals like Boxer, Pelosi and Schumer. But the same was true with same sex marriagevery few liberals were willing to pass federal legislation.
The battle switched to the state level and this is now the case with anti-gun legislation. In 2014, several states passed extreme anti-gun legislation aimed at ultimately nullifying the Second Amendment. Anyone who says different is either lying or extremely naïve.
Liberals hate guns. This hatred is difficult for me to comprehend, but then again, I dont really care to understand this hatred. My only intent is the protection of our rights so as to not end up like other countries in this world.
As previously mentioned, Connecticut, New York, Maryland and California all passed extremist anti-Second Amendment legislation in 2014. These states have done several things with these laws:
Outlawed AR-15 style rifles and other sporting rifles with certain features
Outlawed magazines with a certain capacity which was arbitrarily chosen
Created a gun registry for those who already own one of the outlawed items
Forced mental health professionals to break patient confidentiality
Interfered with free trade
Forced gun makers to relocate and take jobs elsewhere
Washington State also passed I-594 in 2014. This initiative calls for universal background checks on all transfers within the state. Transfers include sales, gifts, loans, and any other time that a firearm leaves the possession of its ownerwhether temporarily or permanently.
The people of Washington didnt truly understand what they were actually doing by approving this initiative. They thought that they were closing a loop hole, which doesnt really exist, and keeping guns out of criminals handswhich it wont.
Liberals know this, but they also know that this technique works. No one wants criminals to have guns. The idea is to convince the general public, who tends to be uneducated about these things, that a law like I-594 will make everyone safer and prevent more shootings like Sandy Hook.
Other states are now considering reasonable gun laws. Liberals used to call it gun control, but have changed gears using the word reasonable because most people want to be considered reasonable. These new types of laws will directly refer to school shootings and the deaths of children as the reason for passage. The plan is for liberal, legislative judges to jump on the chance to rule that the Second Amendment doesnt protect one from background checks.
Universal background checks are just the beginning salvo in this new strategy. Next will come registries of people who the government has deemed mentally unable to own guns. What will the criteria be? Anyone on an anti-depressant? Anyone who has ever visited a mental health professional? Will the government stop at mental health? What about someone with a brain tumor? How about a person that suffers from seizures? What about diabetics? The list is endless of people who suffer from medical conditions that could create safety concerns. For now, it is mental health, but to think that liberals will stop here is silly.
This new strategy and the laws that will be passed (and dont think for a minute that more laws will be passed, its only a matter of time) will be fought one state at a time. This will put pressure on other states to fall in line. Dont think that it wont happen; I never thought that I would see same sex marriage in Utah, but today it is a reality. And the citizens have asked the attorney general to stop fighting it, because we are just throwing away money.
This war on guns will not come down to constitutionality or rule of law. It will not come down to the will of the people, nor what the founding fathers intended. It certainly will not come down to facts and precedent. This fight will come down to money and who can raise the most. Bloomberg will continue to rally his wealthy liberal friends like Gates, Zuckerberg and Ballmer. I dont necessarily see eye to eye with everything the NRA does, nor do I with the Second Amendment Foundation, but I will be contributing to both groups this year because they represent our best chance in this fight.
http://www.gunnews.com/liberals-changing-tactics-war-guns/
Liberals Changing Tactics for War on Guns
By Tom Hudson
2014 was a tough year for liberals. They were crushed in the mid-term elections, and many federal judges have been ruling against their irresponsible, anti-constitutional laws and requiring many liberal states and districts to be more in alignment with what the Second Amendment calls for and what other courts have decided.
Most liberals who were tied to Obama lost their elections. Control of both houses of Congress are now under the control of the republicans (this may be good or badonly time will tell). But not all liberal issues have been disasters this year. Liberals were able to get I-594 passed in Washington Statethus implementing universal background checks.
On the gun control front, liberals have taken more hits than they have given. Michael Bloomberg spent millions of dollars in the last election cycle, and his candidates lost big time. The American people spoke quite clearly that the current state of affairs in Washington, as well as state houses across the nation, is unacceptable. The Second Amendment was a crucial component and point of debate throughout the election process.
But dont be lulled into thinking that we have this thing won and that liberals are giving up. Its just the opposite; they are changing their strategy, and this new strategy works. It is battle tested and proven to work. This article will discuss this strategy and how it has worked in the past and how it could work now if we arent careful or if we get complacent.
In 1996, the 104th Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by what was a veto proof margin. President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law, allowing individual states to pass laws preventing same sex marriage. Many states took advantage of this law and enacted laws banning same sex marriage, while some went as far as passing state constitutional amendments. Other states went forward with attempts at passing same sex marriage laws, allowing for gay couples to marry.
Californias now-famous Proposition 8 was an attempt to ban same sex marriage and create a constitutional amendment at the same time. Prop 8 was a ballot measure as required by law. 52.24 percent of voters approved the measure, and Prop 8 became law.
In 1998, the citizens of Hawaii approved a constitutional amendment approving marriage between men and women.
The list goes onUtah, Idaho, Kansas, Floridaall these states approving laws, by a vote of the citizens, to reflect their moral beliefs by banning same sex marriage.
It looked as if this was a lost cause, this view turned out to be far from the truth. Liberals came up with a new strategy, one that made judges defacto legislators. This strategy gave these judges the ability to create law from the bench. These laws were not subject to debate nor veto. Because our legal system is a collection of good old boys and lifetime appointees, it is nearly impossible to get a judge to rule against a fellow jurist. With this knowledge, liberals went about finding the most liberal of these judges and filed their cases in these courts. This judge shopping most assuredly set liberals up for victory and the people of the United States as losers.
Those who opposed gay marriage were labeled homophobes and intolerant, religious zealots. These labels proved to be detrimental to those labeled as such. Some were forced to endure public ridicule and others even lost their jobs as corporations participated in a new form of political correctness bullying.
In the span of about ten years, America went from having almost no states that allowed gay marriage to a nation that requires it be allowed. Even my home state, Utah, now allows gay marriage. I can assure you that this is not the will of the people, but has been forced upon us by a federal judge in Colorado.
Gee Tom, thanks for the heads up. What does this have to do with the Second Amendment? Everything. The liberals won the same sex marriage battle even when they were outnumbered and out funded. They won, even though the will of the people was clear, as manifested by ballot measures.
This strategy is now being used to push gun control legislation. The gay marriage fight has proven that states rights can be negated by legislative judges. The Supreme Court has also declined to get involved in this fight at this point. Even when they do get involved, which they invariably will, I believe that they will rule in favor of gay marriage. This court has been unpredictable at best and isnt necessarily a friend to the gun owner and Second Amendment supporter.
On a federal level, a universal background check law has never been able to gain traction. Very few politicians have been willing to sign their name to such a drastic measure, minus of course the super radical liberals like Boxer, Pelosi and Schumer. But the same was true with same sex marriagevery few liberals were willing to pass federal legislation.
The battle switched to the state level and this is now the case with anti-gun legislation. In 2014, several states passed extreme anti-gun legislation aimed at ultimately nullifying the Second Amendment. Anyone who says different is either lying or extremely naïve.
Liberals hate guns. This hatred is difficult for me to comprehend, but then again, I dont really care to understand this hatred. My only intent is the protection of our rights so as to not end up like other countries in this world.
As previously mentioned, Connecticut, New York, Maryland and California all passed extremist anti-Second Amendment legislation in 2014. These states have done several things with these laws:
Outlawed AR-15 style rifles and other sporting rifles with certain features
Outlawed magazines with a certain capacity which was arbitrarily chosen
Created a gun registry for those who already own one of the outlawed items
Forced mental health professionals to break patient confidentiality
Interfered with free trade
Forced gun makers to relocate and take jobs elsewhere
Washington State also passed I-594 in 2014. This initiative calls for universal background checks on all transfers within the state. Transfers include sales, gifts, loans, and any other time that a firearm leaves the possession of its ownerwhether temporarily or permanently.
The people of Washington didnt truly understand what they were actually doing by approving this initiative. They thought that they were closing a loop hole, which doesnt really exist, and keeping guns out of criminals handswhich it wont.
Liberals know this, but they also know that this technique works. No one wants criminals to have guns. The idea is to convince the general public, who tends to be uneducated about these things, that a law like I-594 will make everyone safer and prevent more shootings like Sandy Hook.
Other states are now considering reasonable gun laws. Liberals used to call it gun control, but have changed gears using the word reasonable because most people want to be considered reasonable. These new types of laws will directly refer to school shootings and the deaths of children as the reason for passage. The plan is for liberal, legislative judges to jump on the chance to rule that the Second Amendment doesnt protect one from background checks.
Universal background checks are just the beginning salvo in this new strategy. Next will come registries of people who the government has deemed mentally unable to own guns. What will the criteria be? Anyone on an anti-depressant? Anyone who has ever visited a mental health professional? Will the government stop at mental health? What about someone with a brain tumor? How about a person that suffers from seizures? What about diabetics? The list is endless of people who suffer from medical conditions that could create safety concerns. For now, it is mental health, but to think that liberals will stop here is silly.
This new strategy and the laws that will be passed (and dont think for a minute that more laws will be passed, its only a matter of time) will be fought one state at a time. This will put pressure on other states to fall in line. Dont think that it wont happen; I never thought that I would see same sex marriage in Utah, but today it is a reality. And the citizens have asked the attorney general to stop fighting it, because we are just throwing away money.
This war on guns will not come down to constitutionality or rule of law. It will not come down to the will of the people, nor what the founding fathers intended. It certainly will not come down to facts and precedent. This fight will come down to money and who can raise the most. Bloomberg will continue to rally his wealthy liberal friends like Gates, Zuckerberg and Ballmer. I dont necessarily see eye to eye with everything the NRA does, nor do I with the Second Amendment Foundation, but I will be contributing to both groups this year because they represent our best chance in this fight.
