Killing the Poor with Gun Control

Most,if not all, of the current Gun Control proposals have the unintended consequence of placing the poor at a greater risk of violence. It is no secret that gun violence occurs with greater frequency in poor neighborhoods than elsewhere. Nor is it a secret that the majority of gun violence is committed by people of the same race/ethnicity and economic status as the victim and both often live below the poverty lineand even in the same neighbohoods.

Typically the shooter is using an illegal weapon. The proposed gun control laws make it much more difficult for potential victims to defend themselves because guns will be much more expensive and will be less efficient (smaller magazines and less "gun" for the money). Actually they may not be able to afford a self defense weapon at all, and if they can it may be dangerously (cheaply) made.

Every person has a right to self defense. The gun control freaks would deprive the poor of their life; they would deprive the poor of the pursuit of happiness, and sentence the poor to flee from fear if they can. The gun control lobby knows that there are so many illegal guns in the community that all of the "bad" guys can arm themselves with two guns apiece. And there is enough ammunition to fight a small war. With a little organization, cities such as Detroit, Las Angeles, Chicago, and Washington D.C. can be brought to a functional stop with IEDs and random gunfire. Current and proposed gun control will have no effect on this. The politicians and other supporters cannot help but know that their actions will kill the poor. They do so for their own gain. They do so because they do not care. They have so twisted the message that the poor, often trapped in the worst performing school districts, do not have the reading and analytical skills to see through the propaganda. Proposed gun control legislation will only push the poor further and further into the danger zone.

If this keeps up the only way to get a gun will be to join the "bad" guys ... What will it be like when pockets of poverty become armed and organized? What happens when only armoured vehicles or tanks can enter certain areas of a city (the police in certain cities have already purchased armoured vehicles [urban assault vehicles]). Can we envision a time when we are playing Palestinians and Israelis? All of this because some politicians kept people from defending themselves and their families so that he/she could elected. Disgusting.

Do I KNOW that these people are really out to kill the poor or to precipitate a shooting war between the Haves and the Have Nots? No, I do not. But I do know that they are so blinded by their own ego and their own ambition that they cannot see the deadly consequences of their own actions.

Those of us who can see this tragedy coming need to speak up, not only to our own Representatives, but to the poor.We need to find a way to make obvious to the poor (in spite of the false propaganda) the tragic impact that proposed gun control will have on them.

Taking up Arms

The critical is question is: When does an American Citizen forfeit the right of due process and become subject to immediate "execution" as opposed to the requirement for the implementation of due process to include (presumably) some form of independent judicial review. 

It seems to me that the issue revolves around the concept of USA citizens "taking up arms" against the USA. If one takes up arms against one's own country that is instant treason or armed insurrection and instantly removes the individual from citizenship and any protections attached to that status. When John Dickinson and Thomas Jefferson wrote The Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms which was a document issued by the Second Continental Congress on July 6, 1775, to explain why the Thirteen Colonies had taken up arms (specifically at Lexington and Concord) a in what had become the American Revolutionary War The phrase meant literally picking up a gun and using it. Today, of course, things are not so clear cut.

Which Citizens Do We Kill?

A hypothetical with a real parallel: We go to war with X country because it declared war on us. Prior to the declaration of war X worked hard to place sympathetic sleepers into our population and to recruit supporters for itself from our general population. 

Killing American Citizens

Killing American Citizens

There is a difference between killing an enemy and murder. What does a person have to do become an enemy and eligible to be killed? The US Constitution is specific on the subject, Article 3 Section 3,

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

I am not an attorney so whatever I say is subject to “further review”.

My memory is that the Supreme Court has ruled that the protections of the First Amendment (free speech) do not apply to encouraging the violent overthrow of the US Government.

The Constitution makes it clear that levying war against the United States is treasonable. Also adhering (taking the side of) to the enemies of the US which the Constitution defines as giving “...Them Aid and Comfort.” Which phrase I think is open to wide interpretation. I does not specify how much aid or how much comfort (or even what “comfort” is). However, and this is where the government’s approach as outlined in their memo goes off track, the Constitution plainly requires a trial before a citizen can be declared treasonous, “

No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

” Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include: conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA).

The point is to remove the individual from Constitutional protections. The trial could be in abstentia and since by definition no confession is possible it does not have to be in open court. I'm not sure that there is a federal death penalty for treason but the Congress can remedy that.

It seems to me that the government has some work to do before it can start killing US Citizens. Otherwise they may find themselves up on murder charges.
A hypothetical with a real parallel: We go to war with X country because it declared war on us. Prior to the declaration of war X worked hard to place sympathetic sleepers into our population and to recruit supporters for itself from our general population. 

Nation

A nation may refer to a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, or history.^[1] In this definition, a nation has no physical borders. However, it can also refer to people who share a common territory and government (for example the inhabitants of a sovereign state) irrespective of their ethnic make-up.^[2][3] The word nation can more specifically refer to people of North American Indians, such as the Cherokee Nation that prefer this term over the contested term tribe.^[1]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Author's Notes on Immigration and Illegal Border Crossing

Authors Note:

The Barrier

Clearly this process may take some time – possibly even years. I estimate about 18 months to two years complete the Southern Border Fence (1,969 miles +/-). I believe that this fence should be built along the same lines as the “fence” being built by the Israeli's between their country and Palestine (430 miles +/-). Some of this fence/barrier consists of concrete panels 26' high.

This after all a blog based on the perceived principle of Get'Er Done. One of the primary of which is, “know your desired end result”. What is our desired outcome? We want to stop or at least radically slow down illegal border crossings at the southern border of the USA. In my opinion the barrier is not to be the final deterrent but simply is to delay and detect attempts to cross the border until authorities can respond on scene (target twenty minutes from detection). As opposed to stopping the rocket attacks with which the Israelis have to contend. Among other things super sophisticated electronics will not be needed.

As a nation we need to make this a top priority, crash project. We want to visibly demonstrate that we are serious about this legislation. We are not the same no load, lying politicians that made so many unkept promises during the Reagan administration. Millions of people will be waiting for the completion of the barrier.

How to go from 0 to adequate in 2 years or less. First remember that the goal is to delay and detect. A good plan, the use of readily available materials, multitasking, the prepositioning of materials, and the maximum use of currently available manpower and equipment, are key to a quick build. I am not an engineer nor constructor of significance. My initial thoughts are these:

• Other than taking advantage of currently constructed barrier components and naturally occurring barriers a first consideration should be given to plowing (harrowing?) a 30 foot swath on the US side of the border. This swath if lose dirt will shoe the imprints of any one/thing crossing it alerting the watching team and trackers via drone surveillance transmission. In addition certain components can be added to the loose dirt to make discovery and tracking easier.
• As soon as the various parts of the barrier are complete to a point of some effectiveness they should be used as intended.

• There are hundreds of miles of very difficult terrain along the border which form at least the beginnings of a natural border. These should be taken advantage of. Delay and detect, not necessarily stop.
• At the beginning available surveillance drones should be positioned as well possible. Contracts should be let for additional drones sufficient to provide 24/7, 365 coverage of the border.
• Similarly, available helicopters and other people movers sufficient to move men and material to intersect the illegal border crossers and to the Border Transgression Hearing and detention facilities. Contracts should be let for additional helicopters sufficient to provide interdiction within 20 minutes of notification.
• Since some of the border barrier is already established, operations should begin as quickly as possible, including immediate detention and Border Transgression Hearings.
• Man power and equipment should be drawn from the Regular Army, Reserves, Corps of Engineers, Reserves, National Guard, Forrest Service, Departments of Transportation, and any other department or organization that receives federal funding. Private resources are not excluded. Particularly high civil and criminal penalties should be included for fraud in this legislation. Performance rewards and penalties should be part of any contract.
• The barrier project is specifically excluded from the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency.
• An Inspector General's Office will be specifically created to oversee the operations of the barrier project. A report on the barrier project will be made every 6 moths to the appropriate Congressional oversight committees, and to the public. Sufficient staff and funding will be made available to carry out these tasks and will not count against the budget of their home agencies.
• Any funding currently appropriated, or other resources currently assigned to the construction, or improvement/upgrade of federal roads shall be transferred to the barrier project.

Since Border Transgression hearings are not judicial proceedings, and the accused are not US Citizens and do not have access to Constitutional rights, the Hearing Officer is not a judge and need not be an attorney. A Border Transgressor may be identified either by the sworn testimony of two witnesses, or photographic or other acceptable forensic evidence.

The detainee may speak on his or her own behalf and may present testimony and other evidence felt helpful. In no case should each presentation exceed 20 minutes.

The Hearing Officer has not more than 10 minutes to render the decision.

The decision is to be carried out immediately.

Hearings must be recorded.

Immigration and Illegal Border Crossing

IMMIGRATION AND ILLEGAL SOUTHERN BORDER CROSSING

During President Reagan's administration the citizens of America were given to believe that if they allowed illegal immigrants to become Citizens then the Southern Border would be closed. How gullible we were. Behind closed doors the pro-illegal bunch must have been laughing themselves silly. They duped the President and the American people. The border was never closed – never even came close – there is no indication that they ever really intended to close the border.

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

This time the sealing of the southern border MUST be the trigger event for the implementation of the of the remaining legislation.

To avoid any doubts about the status of the Southern Border, the requirements for “sealing” must be part of the legislation.

SUGGESTED SPECIFICATIONS FOR “SEALING”

1. An Israeli style fence (similar to the one the Israelis are building between Israel and Palestine) for the entire length of the Southern Border
2. Sufficient drones and associated manpower to provide constant 24/7 surveillance of the border and the fence.. There should be sufficient and manpower and equipment to provide 15 minute response times to detected border incursions.
3. Rewrite current Border Incursion language to provide mandatory minimum detention time, increasing one each detention.
4. Justice delayed is justice denied. Provision of 24/7 Border Incursion Hearings, so that once detained people trying to enter the USA illegally are taken directly to the Hearing Officer. Sworn testimony taken and any other material presented (25 minutes per side) and disposition by the Hearing Officer given within 10 minutes).
5. People who bring children across the border should also be subject to charges of child abuse/neglect especially if no adequate arrangements for child care have been made on the American side or the border of if the child has suffered physical damage.
   Once all of this is in place AND OPERATIONAL, and verified by the appropriate Inspector General, and approved by the appropriate Senate and House oversight committee(s) the trigger level is met and the remainder of the previously approved law takes immediate effect.

ANOTHER SERIOUS IMMIGRATION PROBLEM

Is people who over stay their legally acquired visas. Again much harsher mandatory punishments must be enacted. Also some method for tracing visa holders must be found.

SUGGESTIONS

1. GPS tracking device in the visa itself.
2. Visa holders MUST have the visa either on their person or with their reach at all times.
3. Each visa holder must appear on a designated day at an automated recognition center which will check their GPS and take a picture and match that picture with their file picture. This should be done once per month. Failure to appear on the proper day should be grounds for immediate detention with deportation following within two weeks. Deportation hearings to be held 24/7.
   In addition there should be some discussion about access to to Constitutional Rights and Citizen Privileges by non-citizens.

SUGGESTIONS: Regarding the 14^th Amendment,

We should explore repealing that part of the 14^th Amendment that grants automatic citizen ship to anyone born in the United States regardless of the citizenship of the parents.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;

Peg Board: General Powell on Bill O'Reilly

Last night (1/30) on the Bill  O'Reilly Show, General Colin Powell took exception to John Sununu saying that President Obama was “lazy”. Gen. Powell said that the comment was “racist”. Well, Gen. Powell it is NOT a racist comment if it is true. In this case it is.

Prez. Obama's entire first term was ,marked by having others do work that should have come from the White House as a matter of leadership if nothing else. Most notable of these were Obama Care which he left to the Democrats in Congress; the national budget; and immigration. Most recently he said that he was going to produce a plan to deal with immigration. Instead, he gave a speech in Las Vegas but, typically, produced no written, comprehensive plan to address the problem.

This has NOTHING to do with his race. By any standard the man is just plain lazy. I doubt that General Powell would keep him on staff for very long.