Monday, November 24, 2008

KEMP ON GUNS AND RIGHTS

From NRA-ILA-- National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action
Obama Selects Janet Reno's
Anti-Gun Point Man As Next Attorney General

So much for "I support the Second Amendment," and so much for the
notion of "change."

Media reports say President-elect Barack Obama has selected Eric
Holder as his Attorney General, and that Holder may already have
accepted the offer. Holder, as Deputy Attorney General under Janet
Reno during the Clinton Administration, said that the Second Amendment
does not protect an individual right, but instead protects the right
to have a firearm when serving with a militia. After leaving office,
Holder stuck to that assertion when he signed Janet Reno's brief to
the Supreme Court in the Heller case, which stated, "The Second
Amendment does not protect firearms possession or use that is
unrelated to participation in a well-regulated militia."

Kemp comment-- the Tyrant is not, actually, yet the 'president
elect'. That will occur if and when the Electoral College votes him
into that position, scheduled for Dec. 15. And there is some question
if the Soopreems will allow that. If the Soopreems disqualify the
Chicago machine politician who won the popular vote, the field is
literally thrown wide open. (Article 12 in Amendment, Constitution for
the US of A)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
In the Heller decision (the DC gun ban case) Scalia rendered the
majority's decision that the Second Article in Amendment to the
Constitution indeed means what it says-- the right of the people to
keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Of course, the scaly Scalia went on to falsify the apparent meaning of
the decision, explicitly blessing licensing and registration and other
'reasonable regulation'..

The equivalent would be declaring that the First Article in Amendment
protects the individuals' right to speak and publish their views, but
subject to governmental approval, by licensing anyone who might wish
to speak, and registering the hardware used in the expression of
opinion-- microphones, computers, printers, pencils and pens....

When viewing the contemporary effort to 'tag' all ammunition, and
the requirement to 'dispose' of all ammunition not purchased with the
tagging in place, it is apparent that the 'First Amendment equivalent'
would involve 'tagging' every piece of paper, and 'disposal' of any
paper not so tagged.

This is already seen, in that many if not all manufacturers of
printers have designed the printers to surreptitiously 'tag' every
page printed, encoding with all-but-invisible 'dots' which allow every
page printed by the device to be traced back to a specific printer.

Further.... it has been 'statute' for 75 years that automatic weapons,
suppressors (silencers), large-caliber firearms, short barreled rifles
and shotguns, and other items of ordnance be specifically and
extraordinarily licensed, with full, in depth background checks,
fingerprints on file, large fees, etc.

How large a step is it to require 'fast' printers, printing presses,
poster-printers and 'plotters' to be subject to the same requirements
of 'extraordinary' licensing and registration? Even computers?
Has anyone noticed that no matter the rhetoric, the bonds are
continually tightened, that individual rights are further and forever
curtailed, and that in fact the only thing that ever changes is that
government always grows larger and stronger?

Mike Kemp

1 comment:

Shirley said...

Interesting facts about printers....