Posted on 05/31/2018 6:25:15 PM PDT by bitt
In an email Tuesday night, former Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul released an ominous statement claiming that a source they have in the Senate revealed Democrats are teaming up with Republicans to push through a massive gun control bill.
According to their source, as Paul explained, “Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) are teaming up with Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to ram through one of the worst nationwide gun confiscation schemes ever devised.”
The gun confiscation bill, according to Paul, is designed to disarm Americans without any due process. The senators are using the recent tragic shooting in Texas as the impetus behind the law—in spite of the fact that this law would not have prevented the shooting at all.
(Excerpt) Read more at investmentwatchblog.com ...
This pending US Senate bill is prompting ever more state legislators to enact “Red Flag” no due process firearm confiscation laws.
Per GOA:
https://cqrcengage.com/gunowners/?0
Protect the Second Amendment
“Red Flag Laws” are really Gun Confiscation Orders
Sources inside the U.S. Senate are now telling us that we may not have seen the last gun control measure to be considered this year.
At a time when Chuck Schumer and his anti-gun minions are blocking reciprocity, hearing protection, and veterans’ rights legislation, the gun-hating zealots are trying to force consideration of a particularly nasty piece of legislation.
That bill, S. 2607, would try to force every state to adopt gun confiscation measures.
Gun Confiscation Orders are sometimes sugar-coated as “red-flag laws” or “extreme risk protection orders.”
But make no mistake about it: They are nothing more nor less than efforts to strip Americans of their gun rights through secret star-chamber proceedings — in which the gun owner is barred from participation.
Under this Rubio-Nelson abomination, the police or an angry “ex” could convene an Orwellian “secret hearing” to strip you of your constitutional rights without giving you a chance to be heard — in what is otherwise known as an ex parte hearing. [proposed section 3042(b)(3)]
The secret hearing would find you “guilty” — not by a standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” ... or not because there was probable cause to believe you had committed a crime ... or not even because there was probable cause to believe you would commit a crime.
Rather, you would be stripped of your rights based on a subjective determination that you presented a “significant danger” to someone, including yourself. [proposed section 3042(b)(2)(A)(iii)]
And, incidentally, the bill strips state courts of all discretion about whether they can decline to take away your rights.
We have some experience with these “star-chamber” proceedings in which only the accuser is in the room. In those cases, the judge almost always issues the order.
In a study of Gun Confiscation Orders in Seattle, the court granted 28 of 29 applications.
A Massachusetts legislator stated, with respect to much-more-limited domestic violence ex parte orders (where only the accuser is represented) that the courts “don’t ask many questions.”
The first time a gun owner learns about the proceedings is when a police SWAT Team, that normally serves high risk arrest warrants for violent criminals, arrives at his door to immediately seize his previously lawfully-owned firearms.
After a fixed number of days, S. 2607 generously allowed you to spend $10,000 and up for attorneys and expert witnesses — in an effort to convince a court that it made a mistake.
Few gun owners have the resources to mount such a challenge, and few courts are willing to reverse themselves on these types of issues.
If you look at the specifics of S. 2607, paragraph-by-paragraph, it is very similar to bills being hawked in the state capitals as the most extreme anti-gun element of the anti-gun agenda.
So there is every indication that the language of this bill ultimately originated in the backroom of Michael Bloomberg’s offices.
We saw with the anti-gun Fix NICS language that when it was stalled in Congress, the Republican leadership attached it to the must-pass omnibus spending bill (which passed in March).
So gun owners have our work set out for us. The next must-pass spending bill will be voted on before October 1.
Gun owners need to let their senators know how toxic this bill is, or there is a chance that we will receive yet another anti-gun “knife in the back” in September.
So please contact your Senators to oppose S. 2607 in all forms, whether as a standalone bill or as an amendment to a larger bill.
[Take Action] Stop Subsidized Banks from Discriminating Against the 2A!
Threats on the Second Amendment come from all angles, not just from anti-gun politicians.
Gun Confiscation Coming to Maine?
There is now a serious possibility that the Maine legislature will enact one of Michael Bloomberg’s nastiest gun control ideas: the Gun Confiscation Order.
Oklahoma on Verge of Being the 15th Constitutional Carry State!
Oklahoma is on the verge of becoming the 15th “constitutional carry” state — a distinction which is expected to happen sooner, rather than later.
Trump’s Bump Stock Regulations Can Turn 500,000 Gun Owners into Felons
When campaigning, Donald Trump said he would respect and honor the Second Amendment.
Gun Confiscation Coming to Pennsylvania?
In a dramatic attack on the Second Amendment, the Pennsylvania legislature is moving to authorize Gun Confiscation Orders in the Keystone State.
The bill numbers are Senate Bill 1141 in the Senate and House Bill 2227 in the House.
At their core, Gun Confiscation Orders — cynically disguised as “red flag laws” or “extreme risk protection orders” — would authorize the police or an angry “ex” to convene a secret star-chamber “ex parte” hearing on whether to suspend your Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
The first thing gun owners learn is when police knock on the door — ready to ransack their house and, if you resist, to arrest or even shoot you and your family.
The standard is not whether there is probable cause to believe that the gun owner has committed a crime, as the Constitution would seem to require. Rather, the standard is some subjective determination about whether the gun owner represents some “danger.”
As in the film Minority Report, Americans are stripped of their fundamental constitutional rights based on the subjective possibility of a “future crime.”
And we know from our limited experience that many accusers lie or make mistakes — even more reach delusional conclusions — and the target is frequently an abused victim who is most in need of the wherewithal to protect against an abuser.
When the accuser is the only one in court, the judge will normally sign the order. Thus, in Seattle, 28 of 29 Gun Confiscation Order applications were approved.
In Massachusetts, in connection with analogous but less far-reaching “restraining orders,” one of sponsors admitted that “judges don’t ask very many questions” before rubber stamping ex parte orders.
After a fixed period of time, the gun owner can ask for a court hearing to restore his or her constitutional rights.
But guess what? Few gun owners have the sophistication or the thousands of dollars it would take to hire a lawyer and expert witnesses.
And few courts are willing to second-guess themselves and reverse the Gun Confiscation Order which has been issued.
In fact, hundreds of thousands of veterans have lost their gun rights without due process pursuant to a comparable procedure.
And recent revelations from the VA suggest that fewer than 50 have successfully invoked this “process” to get their rights back.
Although they preexisted in a couple of states, Gun Confiscation Orders really picked up steam when the Bloomberg/Giffords gun control organizations decided to push them as the most extreme aspect of California’s anti-gun laws.
Since then, the bills have been mass-produced based on a template in the backroom of Bloomberg’s New York offices and exported for quickie adoption in states like Pennsylvania, with only minor tweaks.
Amazingly, the tweaks made by Bloomberg’s Pennsylvania agents make this state’s gun confiscation bills much more insidious than most other states:
• There is absolute civil and criminal immunity, which means that an angry “ex” can bring a vengeful, bad faith ex parte petition without consequences, so long as the person couches their lies in subjective accusations. It also means that police can break down your door and shoot you and your family without consequences.
• The definitions are poorly crafted and could expand the universe of complainants to distant relatives and high school sweethearts.
• Even if a gun owner is absent or unrepresented, the burden of proof is a scintilla of evidence past 50% in order to strip a person of his constitutional rights.
But there’s a larger issue: If the Constitution can be suspended in a secret hearing, where does this lead?
What if this newspaper could be shut down for 21 days without due process — based on a secret complaint? Or an individual could be arrested or imprisoned for 21 days? Or tortured?
Far from being a “consensus proposal,” the suspension of the Constitution in a secret hearing is a constitutional Rubicon from which there is no return.
So please contact your state legislators today in opposition to SB 1141 and HB 2227.
Gun Rights Will Take a Hit if Kevin McCarthy Becomes House Speaker
House Speaker Paul Ryan will be stepping down from Congress this year.
New Bill Would Allow Disgruntled Family Members to Take Your Guns
A number of prominent New Hampshire conservatives have been targeted by “social services” because certain state officials objected to the way they were raising their children or taking care of their parents.
Help Stop Gun Confiscation in Ohio
Governor John Kasich and his Columbus allies are once again attacking the Second Amendment.
Stop Gun Confiscation Orders In Your State
Legislatures across the country are using the shooting in Parkland, Florida, as an excuse to confiscate firearms.
WTF?
I provided TWO established Florida newspaper citations.
And GOA
Tone deaf?
RE:”Sir, until FOXNEWS or WAPO or other National sources pick it up, it is only hearsay.”
Rubio is Deep State.
They want US disarmed.
At the same time as they encourage fraudulently documented foreigners to break into our country.
I have no idea why Florida would re-elect a guy who already tried to give away the country.
Unfortunately, Red Flag Bill supporters are having a field day with DJT’s off the cuff statement in reaction to Parkland shooting...
Search Results
Donald Trump says seize guns now, sort out legalities later | Opinion ...
www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2018/03/donal...Proxy Highlight
Mar 1, 2018 ... President Donald Trump speaks in
the Cabinet Room of the White House, in Washington, Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2018, during a meeting with ...
Trump: Take guns first and worry about due process later - USA Today
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/...Proxy Highlight
Feb 28, 2018 ... WASHINGTON — President Trump
said Wednesday he favors taking guns away from people who might commit violence before going through ...
Trump: Take guns ‘early’ without going to court first - CNBC.com
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/28/trump-says-au...Proxy Highlight
Feb 28, 2018 ... President Donald Trump on
Wednesday called for seizing guns “early” from potentially dangerous people without having to first obtain a court ...
Trump’s ‘Take the Guns’ Remark Sparks Due Process Debate | Time
www.time.com/5184160/trump-guns-due-process/Proxy Highlight
Mar 3, 2018 ... President Trump’s ‘Take the Guns
First’ Remark Sparks Due ... of gun rights: the government seizing weapons from law-abiding citizens. It’s the ...
Trump Stuns Lawmakers With Seeming Embrace of Comprehensive ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/us/politic...Proxy Highlight
Feb 27, 2018 ... At one point, Mr. Trump suggested
that law enforcement authorities should have the power to seize guns from mentally ill people or others who ...
Trump: ‘Take the guns first, go through due process second’ | TheHill
www.thehill.com/homenews/administration/37609...Proxy Highlight
Feb 28, 2018 ... President Trump on Wednesday
voiced support for confiscating guns from certain
Federal means federal. Sorry I was so vague.
I just can’t believe they’d touch THAT third rail just before the mid-terms....
I’m just plain stealin’ that..
The GOP may say all that, but in practice, there would really only be three Xs in the GOP column.
Care to guess?
There are a couple of bills in the hopper, but they have been referred to subcommittee.
Doom on the gun grabbers if they miraculously manage to get to Step 5
Re: Your Step 3...
MY President also has a (Veto) pen and a (Mega) phone — in the form of as many rallies as he wants to schedule
This will cause all kinds of problems. A lot of folks will not be very cooperative. If true, They’ll tie this to some personal economic interests, like wanna keep ur house, turn in gun(s). People will get hurt. Everyday folks, police, govt types. These politicians will get more people killed with stuff like this, then just letting things be.
I thought I was the Paul Revere of Gun Confiscation Orders but you have taken the cake.
Shout it from the housetops, FRiend! Any gun owner can be fingered by anyone with a grudge. It’s that simple.
We’re in East Germany and don’t know it. And watch for 1-800-SNITCH hotlines to pop up where “you don’t have to give your name!” to denounce someone you don’t like as “a danger to others”.
Romney, Cruz et al....
At least McCain was indeed born of US parents overseas on government business, as were many children born to US service members around the world.
RE: “my President has a veto pen...”
Don’t be so sure in light of what he said after Parkland:
Mar 1, 2018 ... President Donald Trump speaks in
the Cabinet Room of the White House, in Washington, Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2018, during a meeting with ...
Trump: Take guns first and worry about due process later - USA Today
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/...Proxy Highlight
Feb 28, 2018 ... WASHINGTON — President Trump
said Wednesday he favors taking guns away from people who might commit violence before going through ...
Trump: Take guns ‘early’ without going to court first - CNBC.com
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/28/trump-says-au...Proxy Highlight
This is exactly what the 2nd Amendment is in the Constitution for, and was designed to prevent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Wake me when the shooting starts in earnest.
I doubt it too. Doesn’t sound likely.
Freegards
That’s what made him the perfect Designated Loser for the Kenyanesian Usurper.
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.
