2A News

Tax collectors in Florida are now publicly announcing the values of being armed when demanding money from citizens. The only problem is that the state bans open carry for civilians that the tax collectors are stealing money from.

If you’re leery about government intervention in your life, and you know that taxation is theft, this article will probably strike a nerve. However, on the other hand, if you revile and worship the government which steals from you and creates edicts you must follow under threats of violence using your stolen money, you’ll love what they are doing down in the Sunshine state.

“A Central Florida tax collector says a new policy will allow his employees to openly carry firearms while they work,” The Associated Press reports. “Seminole County Tax Collector Joel Greenberg told the Orlando Sentinel that according to Florida law, he and his employees are considered ‘revenue officers’ and are exempt from the state’s ban on the open carrying of firearms while performing their duties.”

Ready for the glaring hypocrisy?

The rationale behind the move is to save taxpayers money by eliminating the need to hire private security.

Know what else would save taxpayers money? No government theft (taxes), or even perhaps lowering the tax rate to the point that people aren’t willing to shoot at tax collectors over what’s obviously amounting to putting a gun to the head of a person and demanding money. Last time we looked up the definition of theft, taxation fell firmly into that category. No amount of mental gymnastics could convince a free thinker that money they made is somehow the property of anyone else.

But, “tax collector Joel Greenberg says he is a ‘big believer in the Second Amendment,’” letter to the editor writer Gordon Crawford points out in the Orlando Sentinel. “If that is truly the case, he would know that this constitutional amendment was put in place to protect the public from government tyranny, not to arm the government” making stealing easier for government officials.

Not that the courts have any incentive to provide for that. As noted by the Sun Sentinel in March, “The Florida Supreme Court found the state’s ban on openly carrying handguns constitutional, raising the stakes for open carry laws under consideration in the Legislature this year.” But if you work for the government, and steal from others for a living, you can be armed. How odd, right? People want to protect their lives with guns when stealing. And the constitution already literally declares that all gun laws are unconstitutional. It’s the four little words no socialist wants to hear: Shall not be infringed.

It’s more than obvious that this kind of “action” is exactly what the founders of the nation did not intend when writing the second amendment. All the more proof that the government does not protect rights, it’s our job to do that. The government is stealing from us at gunpoint and a few even claim that as long as they throw in a bridge here and there, it’s worth it.

But is it worth it? What would the founders do? They are probably spinning in their graves with disgrace at the loss of freedom we’ve allowed. This seems to come right out of a dystopian dictatorship.

Via SHTFPlan.

California’s draconian new gun laws will require residents of the Golden state to register their “assault weapons” with the state (which they will have to pay to do of course) by the end of the year.  But thanks to capitalism and the free market, gun makers have already figured out workarounds.

One of the new laws labels an “assault weapon” as any gun that doesn’t have a fixed magazine.  So Franklin Armory owner Jay Jacobson invented “Drop in Fixed Magazine” or DFM. Jacobson had demonstrated his patented new device which is designed to get around the state’s new “assault weapons” law. The new law clamps down on a previous device known as a bullet button to Californians. The bullet button was a workaround for an earlier ban on rifles with detachable and quickly reloadable ammunition magazines. The DFM invention is actually ingenious for those stuck in the Golden state. The magazine is fixed from the bottom as the law requires; but it can come out the top, technically legal because it involves partially disassembling the gun. It’s a workaround that still allows shooters to quickly reload with very little delay.

If curious as to how the magazine works, watch the below video.


“Basically if it’s not written that you can’t do it, it should be good to go. So it’s not a loophole, it’s just the legislature hasn’t covered that yet,” said Jacobson. And the good news is that that is not the only new product on the market for Californians.

CBS News San Francisco says they have found at least six new inventions that work around the new law.  One is the AR Maglock, which allows California AR-15 owners to comply with existing fixed magazine laws, thus avoiding Department of Justice registration. The AR MAGLOCK engages the magazine so it stays “fixed” in the firearm until the action is disassembled, complying with California SB 880 & AB 1135, and Department of Justice regulations.

Other inventions to get around the registration of your gun are the Patriot Mag Release, the MA Loader, and the Bear Flag Defense. They are all designed to allow bullet button gun owners to avoid registering, yet still, have fast reloading weapons. Many anti-gun hoplophobes reside in California, and they are not happy that the private market has found workarounds.  But Jacobson says it will always be this way, and the market is going to provide.

“Criminals don’t care. So the only people that are affected by this are law abiding Californians that are trying to do the right thing. The legislature has tried several times to basically find ways to prevent the AR-15 from entering California. And the reality is that whether it’s Franklin Armory or my peers in the industry, there’s always going to be a way to make the firearm legal in California, and they are just grasping at straws,” said Jacobson.

The Department of Justice won’t say whether any of these devices are legal until after it issues formal regulations on how to implement the new assault weapons ban, a process that is six months behind schedule because a government is inefficient at everything. They can’t seem to even roll out a ban on an item they hate with the mass majority of the state’s voters behind them. But the private market is well ahead of these new draconian laws.

Via SHTFPlan.com

The anti-gun crowd will always stoop to new lows when pretending good guys with guns are the ones we should all worry about. This even in the face of facts suggesting scenarios where bad guys with guns do bad things, good guys with guns often save lives.

Ten states have legislation in place that protect concealed carry on college campuses. Never mind that the 2nd amendment should already do this. In these ten states concealed carry students/teachers have not caused problems.

Additionally, places where shootings occur, more times than not, are places where legal concealed carry is not allowed.

Anti-gunners know this. So they’re constantly scrambling for new arguments. And Senator Durbin has come up with quite a whopper.

He’s actually now arguing that concealed carry prevents free speech from taking place. This because there might be someone present who is concealed carrying, and that reality might be intimidating by just knowing it’s possible.

Or something…

It’s ironic that a nation with an amendment guaranteeing the right to keep and bear arms is governed by a body of Americans not allowed to keep and bear arms when traveling to and from work. This because Washington D.C. does not acknowledge the 2nd amendment. The carrying of firearms in the district is unconstitutionally prohibited and no one seems willing to do a damn thing about it.

Well, almost no one.

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala. is stepping up to the plate to begin a push for 2nd amendment rights for Representatives in the district.

Via NY Post.

A Republican congressman who survived the horrific baseball shooting will offer legislation this week to allow lawmakers to carry guns throughout the nation’s capital.

“I’m going to be introducing legislation this week … to allow congressmen to carry a sidearm, should they so desire,” Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Members of Congress are “high-profile targets, but we have absolutely no way to defend ourselves because of Washington, DC’s rather restrictive gun laws.”

Good! But a frustrating part of this story is that the legislation is designed only to protect the 2nd amendment for elected representatives. It blatantly and openly doesn’t do anything for average Americans who also wish to utilize their 2nd amendment rights.

Brooks said the legislation would allow members of Congress to be armed in places throughout Washington where average citizens typically cannot carry guns.

Hmmm… good enough for the goose but not the gander?

In any event it’s good to see common sense still exists in some. Now the question is, where will Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell stand on the matter?

The anti-gun liberals just don’t get it. Let’s put it in the simplest of ways to explain the reality they just can’t seem to embrace.

Law abiding gun owners by definition do not commit gun crime.

Seattle politicians are perfect examples of this bankrupt, backwards thinking. They recently passed a massive gun tax, $25 per firearm and $0.05 per round of ammo, all designed to raise money to fight gun crime. They estimated the tax would raise between $300,000 and $500,000 annually, all of which would be used to fight gun crime.

But they didn’t really think that one through. Turns out gun sales in the city plummeted by 20% and the tax will end up raising no more than $200,000 on the high end. It could end up being closer to $100,000 by the end of the year.

What’s worse is gun related crime has increased. And not by a little.

It increased by a lot.

Comparing the first five months of 2017 with the same period before the gun tax went into effect, reports of shots fired are up 13 percent, the number of people injured in shootings climbed 37 percent and gun deaths doubled, according to crime statistics from the Seattle Police Department.

So in essence, the tax discouraged legal gun ownership (you know, good guys having guns), didn’t raise the money they planned for and had the effect of increased gun related crime.

I’m guessing the only people shocked by this are the people who thought it was a good idea to begin with.

 

A man pumping gas in Illinois was randomly confronted by a gunman who approached his car, drew his weapon and attempted to kill him.

Police say a man dressed in the orange jacket in the video below is Ronald Morales. After apparently staring down the driver who was pumping gas, Morales hastily approached the man, gun drawn. He opened the passenger side door in what appears to be an attempt at exchanging words, but the driver had already seen Morales draw a weapon. In turn, he drew his own weapon and a shootout ensued.

Morales was shot, quickly turned and ran out of view of the camera and subsequently collapsed and died a short time later.

Police say the driver will not be charged because he acted in self defense:

The video proves once again that the Second Amendment saves lives, because determined criminals who intend to harm innocent people will absolutely get their hands on a weapon regardless of background checks or waiting periods.

Incidents such as this one play out across America on an almost daily basis.

Justified Self Defense: Mom Kills Armed Intruder with Shotgun; 9-1-1 Operator Gives Her the OK To Shoot:

“She had no time to wait for police… so she pulled the trigger.”

An 11 Year-Old Demonstrates Gun Control:

“Not Only Good Judgment But Also Good Marksmanship, Striking Only the Intended and Lawful Target”

Story first appeared at SHTFPlan.

Now that President Trump has addressed the NRA and pledged nearly four years of no gun control pushes, the 2nd amendment is high on the minds of many. With this in mind it seems fitting to watch a flashback moment of a time when kids were allowed to play cops and robbers without fear of leftist backlash.

The following ad for a toy tommy gun was aired back in the 60s. Can you imagine what would happen if an ad like this were aired today?

Liberal heads would literally explode.

Tip of the hat to Clash Daily for the great find!

Neil Gorsuch will be sworn in today and will take a seat on the Supreme Court at a time in which a massive 2nd amendment case may end up in the court before April ends. There are several cases that could be decided to the SCOTUS with Gorsuch taking part in the decision, but one such case stands out for millions of 2nd amendment right supporters.

What kind of 2nd amendment case, you might ask? Well, in D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago the court stood with the constitution, ruling a state like California or Illinois cannot prohibit private firearm ownership in the privacy of one’s own home. While this was certainly a good and correct ruling, it did not extend to protect the actual right to keep and bear arms period. The 2nd amendment in no way states Americans can only keep and bear arms inside their homes.

So a new case making its way to the SCOTUS, should the court accept it, addresses the right to carry outside the home. In most states this isn’t an issue. Most states are in line, in some way or another, with the right to keep and bear arms. But in states like California there are counties where it’s virtually impossible to obtain a concealed carry permit. This because of state law that doesn’t require a permit to be issued upon request, but instead gives counties the authority to decide whether or not to “grant” the right to bear arms. Something the 2nd amendment already does.

In 2016 the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled states like California can choose to write legal loopholes that prohibit the ability to obtain a concealed carry permit for use outside the home. This is an obvious and blatant violation of the 2nd amendment and activist groups immediately challenged the ruling.

That challenge is what may end up at the Supreme Court later this month. And if the SCOTUS rules correctly, states like California will no longer be able to refuse an application to obtain a concealed carry permit for use outside of the home. Essentially, the Supreme Court can and should rule that all states must operate on a “shall issue” permitting system. Meaning, if an American citizen requests a concealed permit, such a permit shall be issued.

Being America and all… there is absolutely nothing wrong with the fruits of capitalism leading to a an hour or so of pure firearm awesomeness. And one guy spent $1,000 to do just that.

The man in the following video got to shoot a wide range of firearms, many of which were full auto capable. And to top it off… a minigun of course.

Fantastic afternoon video.

Enjoy!

A German pharmaceutical company is out with a TV ad for an eye vitamin that is turning heads across the internet. The ad features two guys at an indoor shooting range and gives the appearance that the shooter is not a good aim.

That is, until his true intent is revealed. And as the ad implies, the shooter was able to accomplish his goal thanks to the “Eye Vital” product.

Pretty dang smart ad, in our view. And it’s an ad the political left in the U.S. would lose their collective minds over.

https://youtu.be/6ouH8DypMZ4

Email Newsletter