Navy divers search in vain for lost weapons
Posted on 06/10/2018 4:57:42 AM PDT by Ken Regis
U.S. Navy Divers Tasked to Investigate Claims
By Ken Regis
The U.S. Navy was summoned to nearby Badluck Lake, Wisconsin to investigate claims made by several residents of Armbegone, a fishing village with a population of 850 permanent residents.
“We learned that an extraordinary number of local residents had similar experiences at the lake and we wanted to confirm their accounts and, at a minimum, recover their property” said Master Chief Petty Officer and Master Diver, Gil Abel who is stationed at the U.S. Navy’s facility in Great Lakes, Illinois.
Navy divers search in vain for lost weapons
After diligently searching the bottom of Badluck Lake for 5 days, the mission ended. Nothing was found. “We expected to get a bunch of weapons from the bottom of the lake, but we didn’t find one!” said Abel.
The DOD was called to conduct the search after passage of the controversial Gun Registration Act of 2019. The new law makes it a crime to own a gun without a federally issued license and directs the Attorney General to maintain a database of every privately-owned weapon in the Nation. After Attorney General Sessions recused himself from the process because he claimed he had seen a “rifle or something in a Walmart once”, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein assumed the responsibility for enforcing the new law.
Armbegone was the DOJ’s pilot program according to Rosenstein, “Everybody in the town has similar stories. They were on the lake, the rowboat rocked, and their weapon went down to ‘Davey Jones’ locker.”
“We’re thinking about moving our pilot enforcement program to another place” says Rosenstein.
Having it on with the DOJ
Except they’ll also expect a POLICE REPORT of the loss of the firearm, PRIOR to the claim being made. And by the way, if you make that report, you better be DAMN SURE that your gun is never discovered anywhere else.
All cute and Moulin Rouge and all the stuff about Civil War 2, but in the end, if the Left gets power, they WILL get our guns, and with very, very, little resistance...they simply are not so dumb as to take us on head-on (i.e., door to door), they’ll do it slowly, very slowly, until there’s too few of us left to stop them.
Your reasoning is very similar to mine in all respects on this subject.
There’s this human idiosyncrasy where drastic or far out things will never happen to them. One of the best examples of the last 100 years are the Jews murdered by Hitler. Many just did not think it was real or it would affect them and just willingly got on the cattle cars and into the showers.
Americans will be the same when gun control comes about. The cops may not go door to door, but if such a law is passed and citizens are called to turn them in, I betcha 80 - 90% will be voluntarily turned in. Look at Australia.
Australia is quite different from the U.S. about this.
We see, when registration of semi-automatic rifles is called for, the civil disobedience rate is from 70%-95%, and this is in both East Coast states (New York, Connecticut) and West Coast (California).
The vast majority of people simply refuse to comply.
U.S. Navy Divers Tasked to Investigate Claims after the Supreme Court ruled that the legislation was constitutional.
Another good example is what happened in the 1920s regarding alcohol prohibition. One of the largest demonstrations of continued civil disobedience soon followed it’s enactment until it was ultimately abandoned in 1933.
I predict it will be slightly different this time.
So how can the DoD be called into perform an investigatory function in a law enforcement investigation?
As a diver who has worked with police in many recovery efforts, you “get a feel” when you are on a fools errand for a prosecutor. The old “I lost my guns overboard in a freak boating accident” is just such a dive op. OTOH, the US Navy is alway looking for realistic training ex’s that will keep their skills sharp.
I had a friend who once hosted a group from one of the Soviet satellite states in the early 90s, where guns were banned.
The guests told my friend they kept a shotgun buried in a hole and poured used motor into the hole to keep it from rusting.
Even though gun ownership was illegal, these guys were not unarmed.
“...they’ll do it slowly, very slowly, until there’s too few of us left to stop them....”
Seriously, I wouldn’t be surprised if the democrats tried to pass a law making you a “prohibited person” for getting so much as a parking ticket.
Do you think for a minute the scenario in this story would not happen?
As others write, too many people are weak sheep and will turn in guns rather than create risk for themselves. We see this already in Hawaii and other places where law abiding public is disarmed and only criminals and the government have guns. They are now dependent upon the goodwill of that government. Nobody fought back. California is much the same.
Millennials, with their faces in their phones, won't even notice or care if guns are banned in this country.
LOLOL, well done... WELL DONE INDEED!!!
Marbury v. Madison 1803, vol 5, pg 137
It is also not entirely unworthy of observation that, in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned, and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the Constitution, have that rank.
Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written Constitutions, that
a law repugnant to the Constitution is void,
and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886)
While acts of a de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law and existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy, the acts of a person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist de jure can have no validity whatever in law.
An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.
Did the see the “deep state” down there?
A law repugnant to the Constitution is NOT void until a court finds it in conflict with the Constitution.
For easily confused folks the land referred to in the Supreme Law of the Land, aka the Constitution, is the United States of America, aka, America.
Public opinion does not trump court decisions.
Later, when reporters asked the Navy to explain the 5,824 firearms stowed in the holds of the support vessels, a spokesman stated: “they were there when we left port, honest.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.