| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Shredding the Professor Who Said 2nd Amendment Should be Secretly Repealed (Video)
Just when you think you’ve seen it all from liberals… think again. If Barack Obama’s presidency, and Hillary Clinton’s time as Secretary of State haven’t taught the country how little the rule of law or the Constitution mean to liberals, but rather how “the ends justify the means” for absolutely anything, I offer you the words of U.C.L.A. Professor Adam Winkler.
in a recent New York Times Op-Ed, the “Professor” Winkler advocates “secretly denying” Americans of their fundamental right to bear arms on the grounds that we already live in an Orwellian police state anyway, and besides, the government has done way worse in the past, like with the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. Seriously? This jackass is law professor, and THAT is his argument? In the first video below, I shred this Communist “professor’s” opinion to shreds.
Then, there’s an interview with the director of Amerigeddon, Mike Norris, explaining why he felt the need to make a movie about a U.S. government gone wild during a state of Martial Law. It should be pretty obvious why he made the movie, since the federal government has completely gone off the deep end, but you can hear from him directly why he made the movie. After the interview with Mike Norris, is the actual article written by “Professor” Winkler, and then finally I close with some humor and some wise words from the Doctor of Common Sense and his thoughts on ”Professor” Winkler.
SUBSCRIBE TO THE TOP STORIES OF THE WEEK IN THE NEWSLETTER HERE
FOR MORE NEWS BY VOICE OF REASON CLICK HERE!
As I covered in the video, the “professor’s position in the New York Times was completely ridiculous. I’m not sure who should be more embarrassed by the article, the New York Times for publishing it, or the “professor” for writing it. First, “Professor” Winkler says:
“Such principles, which were part of the framers’ broad conception of due process, have not always been followed when it comes to national security, from the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II to the Bush administration’s warrantless surveillance program. Yet those principles can provide a “sound basis” for no-buy lists.”
SOUNDS BASIS?
YOU’RE USING THE INTERNMENT OF U.S. CITIZENS AND WARRANTLESS SURVEILLANCE AS YOUR “SOUND BASIS?“
Winkler goes on:
“Congress should authorize no-buy lists but mandate that appropriate protections be put in place. If the attorney general believes a suspected terrorist should be added to the list, she should have to go to court first and offer up evidence. Only after concluding that the attorney general has probable cause should the court approve the denial of the suspect’s right to buy a gun…. “
SECRETLY OF COURSE…
Dear “Professor,” pay attention:
The right to own a firearm has been deemed a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, which means it cannot be taken from a person without Due Process, so the burden to prove a person should not be allowed to posses a firearm is on the government NOT the person. Said another way, flying is NOT a fundamental right, so the government may revoke that right, and then make an individual carry the burden of proving they should be permitted to fly.
With fundamental rights (as determined by the Supreme Court), to deprive someone of life, liberty, or property, the law doing so must be the LEAST restrictive means possible to achieve a COMPELLING government interest. By LEAST restrictive, there cannot be a way to achieve the interest and the law cannot be over or under inclusive; by COMPELLING interest it must be NECESSARY. We already have cases (the Late Senator Kennedy) who ended up on the no fly list by mistake, so clearly the list was over inclusive, and therefore NOT a valid way to revoke a person’s Second Amendment right.
If all that “actual law” stuff is too confusing for liberals, let me translate the legal mumbo jumbo it into language a liberals can understand. How about this: Since Freedom of Religion is a fundamental right, which means the same standards apply as for the fundamental right to bear arms, why don’t we deny the refugees coming into the country their First Amendment Right to practice Islam until they prove to the government they are not terrorists? OR, how about we take away this idiot Winkler’s Freedom of Speech until he can prove he has a clue what he’s talking about?
Just like with the Second Amendment the “professor” advocates taking in “secret” and without due process, in my examples the burden of proof would shift to the refugees in the first example, and to “Professor” Winkler in the second example. The burden would be on them prove they should be given their fundamental right back, rather than the government having the burden of proof before taking their rights away. If liberals are in favor of that… I’d consider supporting their “No Fly, No Gun” list.
“Professor” Winkler goes on to say:
“Similar procedures for denying someone the right to possess firearms are already in place for domestic abusers. A person harmed or threatened by her spouse can obtain a court injunction barring the spouse from being near her. Under federal law in certain cases, the spouse will also be denied the right to have a gun.”
“Professor,” and I use the term loosely, do I need to remind you that to classify someone as a domestic abuser they’ve been convicted of a crime, and hence upon conviction they have sufficient notice their fundamental right has been revoked. The government has met their burden if the person has been convicted. If there hasn’t been a conviction, and the “Professor” is referring to anyone who’s ever been accused of domestic abuse, then wouldn’t a blanket statement that all people accused of domestic abuse be unjustly stereotyping, or “profiling” which we know liberals are so against????
Finally, to prevent abuse, “Professor” Winkler says:
“To ensure that the no-buy list isn’t being abused, the law should also require that the attorney general file periodic, confidential reports to an appropriate congressional oversight committee where pro-gun lawmakers can police any executive branch abuses.”
I’m sorry, but would the “professor” be referring to the same Attorney General that first redacted, and later CHANGED the transcript of the Orlando shooter’s 911 call? Is he referring to the same Attorney General that has yet to indict Hillary Clinton? Is THAT the Attorney General we should be expecting to “file reports” to make sure there is no abuse? Please!
In the following interview, Doc Burkhart and Edward Szall from True News conduct a special in-studio interview with the director of Amerigeddon, Mike Norris. Amerigeddon’s storyline is based on the scenario of a future EMP attack on the United States. The plot is fictional, but according to audience members we interviewed after a screening, the events of the film are all too plausible in today’s geopolitical climate. When asked why he made the movie, Mike responds:
“Our government isn’t really out there to help us. Our government is really taking its citizens down a dark and ugly path (one that we’ve seen many times throughout history I’m afraid). I know it’s been a rough week in Florida, I saw what happened… but in my heart of hearts, I really believe they [the government] are trying to disarm the population, and they will do it by ANY means necessary, whether it’s lying, cheating, or stealing…”
FACEBOOK | GOOGLE+ | TWITTER | PINTEREST | STUMBLE UPON | TUMBLER
CHECK OUT THE NEW GOOGLE+ PAGE!
Adam Winkler, a U.C.L.A. School of Law professor writes:
THE massacre in Florida is a horrifying reminder that terrorists don’t need airplanes to kill scores of people: All they need are commonplace firearms. Gun-control groups are already issuing calls to do more to keep suspected terrorists from buying guns, while those against stricter gun laws say we shouldn’t deny people their constitutional rights on the basis of mere suspicion. They are both correct. But there is a solution.
Federal law bars felons, the mentally ill, drug addicts and people convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors from possessing firearms. Nothing, however, prevents a suspected terrorist from walking into a gun store and buying as many guns as he wants. According to a report by the F.B.I., more than 200 people on the terrorist watch list legally bought guns from federally licensed dealers in 2010.
Islamic terrorists seem to be well aware of this loophole, and some have urged their followers in America to take advantage of our lax gun laws. In a 2011 video, a spokesman for Al Qaeda noted the easy availability of weapons in the United States and asked sympathizers, “So what are you waiting for?”
Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the government has kept suspected terrorists from boarding airplanes by placing them on no-fly lists. Isn’t it time we also had no-buy lists? In a speech on Monday, Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, seemed to support this idea, saying, “If you’re too dangerous to get on a plane, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in America.”
Although endorsed by both the Obama and George W. Bush administrations, the creation of something like a no-buy list has been vigorously opposed by the National Rifle Association. The gun lobby objects that the administrations’ proposals would give the attorney general too much discretion over who is put on such a list. No one should be deprived of constitutional rights on the shaky ground that the attorney general merely suspects the person might be a terrorist.
We should take the N.R.A.’s criticisms seriously. Due process of law is a vital constitutional principle and Americans have a right to own firearms for self-protection.
Does this mean we should drop the idea of a no-buy list? No. It just means we need one that is fair.
One promising model can be found in Fourth Amendment law on search and seizure. The Constitution allows the government to invade our privacy by, say, wiretapping our telephones, for law enforcement purposes in limited circumstances. First, the prosecutor must have probable cause, or sufficient evidence of wrongdoing. Second, the search must be approved by the courts.
Such principles, which were part of the framers’ broad conception of due process, have not always been followed when it comes to national security, from the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II to the Bush administration’s warrantless surveillance program. Yet those principles can provide a sound basis for no-buy lists.
Congress should authorize no-buy lists but mandate that appropriate protections be put in place. If the attorney general believes a suspected terrorist should be added to the list, she should have to go to court first and offer up evidence. Only after concluding that the attorney general has probable cause should the court approve the denial of the suspect’s right to buy a gun.
This court proceeding, of course, would be secret. Although that denies the person included on the no-buy list the opportunity to rebut the attorney general’s evidence, we do the same thing every day with search warrants and wiretaps for criminal suspects. Our right to bear arms is no more fundamental than our right to privacy, and treating them similarly can help keep us safer from terrorists.
For maximum secrecy, Congress could assign these probable cause determinations to the jurisdiction of the existing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The judges on this court have a deep understanding of the nation’s national security threats.
Similar procedures for denying someone the right to possess firearms are already in place for domestic abusers. A person harmed or threatened by her spouse can obtain a court injunction barring the spouse from being near her. Under federal law in certain cases, the spouse will also be denied the right to have a gun.
Some opponents of gun control complain because such injunctions are issued without first notifying the spouse, but the courts have consistently said the practice is constitutional.
To ensure that the no-buy list isn’t being abused, the law should also require that the attorney general file periodic, confidential reports to an appropriate congressional oversight committee where pro-gun lawmakers can police any executive branch abuses.
Of course, like any law, a no-buy list won’t be a perfect solution. (And an imperfect version of a no-buy list, with tight deadline requirements, was proposed in the Senate last year.) With over 300 million guns in America and private gun sales allowed with no background check whatsoever, a determined terrorist will most likely still be able to obtain guns. Yet the easiest, most convenient way to buy guns — from a gun store, with the best prices and selection, like the one where the Orlando attacker bought his guns — wouldn’t be available.
The best way to honor those who died in Orlando is to do everything we can to reduce the chances of more innocent lives being lost to terrorism. And we can do it while respecting the Constitution.
Finally, because I needed a good laugh after reading what the idiot “professor” wrote, and then making the video shredding his ridiculous position, I’ve included the following video for some humor.
FAIR WARNING: THE DOCTOR OF COMMON SENSE CAN BE A BIT CRASS
DO NOT WATCH IF YOU HAVE DELICATE SENSIBILITIES…
SUBSCRIBE TO THE TOP STORIES OF THE WEEK IN THE NEWSLETTER HERE
FACEBOOK | GOOGLE+ | TWITTER | PINTEREST | STUMBLE UPON | TUMBLER
NEWS PEOPLE ARE BEING DISTRACTED AWAY FROM HEARING ABOUT:
Obama Threatened De-Funding Our Military Unless Terrorists Released, Now This?
They’re Coming for Your Guns Using the Same Stupid Arguments; Be Ready (Video)
Black Lives Matter and Soros Plan to Escalate Chaos Forcing Martial Law (Video)
Obama: Be Ready For EMP Attacks, Engineered Pandemics, Massive Earthquakes, and Martial Law
FEMA Begins Massive Earthquake and Tsunami Drill Called “Cascadia Rising” Starting June 7 (Video)
Mainstream Media Finally Admits 72 Mass Banker ‘Suicides’ Were Criminal Conspiracy
Why Did Illuminated George Soros Liquidate 37% of His Stock to Buy Gold? (Video)
How Will the U.S. Conduct Trade With Worthless U.S. Dollars and No Gold? (Video)
13 States Obama Is Using for His Nefarious Secret Agenda (Video)
Obama Knowingly Lets in Refugees With Tuberculosis: Ships Them to Indiana (Video)
Are Elite Military Units Gearing Up for a Major Move on the Homefront? (Videos)
Proof Massive Underground Military Bases and Complex Tunnels are Real (Videos)
Prepping: Know Where FEMA Camps Are Before Martial Law Gets Declared (Videos)
FOR MORE ON BARACK COMING FOR OUR GUNS!
G. Edward Griffin: This Story Could Be the Smoking Gun For All False-Flag Ops
5 More Reasons to Question the Official Story of the Orlando Shooting (Video)
Why Are Mass Shootings Up 700% and at an All Time High Under Barack Obama (Videos)?
American Revolution Requires Just One Bullet Be Fired
The World is on Fire; Obama Declares U.S. Constitution Public Enemy #1
Breaking News: Obama Orders Hammond Ranch Destroyed!
Happy New Year! Obama Has Targeted Your Gun Rights for Just After Christmas
All You Need To Know About Obama’s Coming Gun Grab
Whistleblower Exposes CA Shooting Cover up – Guess Who It Implicates
Mass Shooting, 300 Shot At, 17 Wounded, Media Silent. Why?
Mass Shootings Have Skyrocketed 700% Under Obama – Why?
Obama Wants Americans Disarmed – Because That’s What Executioners Do
Texas Sheriff Defies Obama: ‘If You Try to Disarm Us,’ a ‘Revolution’ is Coming
New Court Ruling Paves Way For Mass Gun Confiscation In America
Patriots Guard Home of Veteran to Stop VA From Confiscating His Guns
| THE VOICE OF REASON: | |
| Facebook: | https://www.facebook.com/LastGreatStand |
| Youtube: | https://www.youtube.com/c/RightWingConspirator |
| Google + | https://plus.google.com/+Thelastgreatstandconspirator/posts |
| https://twitter.com/#!/LastGreatStand | |
| Seen.Life | http://www.seen.life/profile/21900069-voice-of-reason |
| Minds.com | https://www.minds.com/VoiceofReason |
| Grassfire | http://grassfire.com/users/voiceofreason/profile/ |
| Tea Party Community | https://www.teapartycommunity.com/profile-151600/ |
| Right.IS | http://right.is/contributor/pages/351/169/bio.html |
SUBSCRIBE TO THE TOP STORIES OF THE WEEK IN THE NEWSLETTER HERE
FACEBOOK | GOOGLE+ | TWITTER | PINTEREST | STUMBLE UPON | TUMBLR
FREE GUIDE TO ECONOMIC COLLAPSE OR MARTIAL LAW…
AT THE OFFICIAL BLOG SITE BELOW!
FACEBOOK | GOOGLE+ | TWITTER | PINTEREST | STUMBLE UPON | TUMBLER
The only arguments should be that:
We need these weapons to be a deterrent to a totalitarian police state from becoming the next nazi germany, or worse!
We need these weapons because the gun genie is out of the bottle, and there is no putting it back!
We need these weapons because the United States has supplied far more powerful weapons by the millions to countries south of the border, to drug cartels, and to countries all around the world, who in spite of the U.S. Supplying their weapons, still hate us passionately!
We need these weapons because our government and its lamestream media propagandists lie to us everyday! They tell us one guy is responsible for orlando, when the audio clearly tells us there were at least two shooters, probably three!
We need these weapons because there is clearly something weird going on, where the top of our government is clearly not working with our best interests in mind, and are currently flooding the country with south of the border criminals, and OTMs (other than mexicans) including terrorists from the middle east, and elsewhere, who come here with plans to do us harm!
We need these weapons because it is better to be able to defend ourselves, then to hide and cower in place! Hoping, and praying, we aren’t found! Begging for our lives if we are! All the while praying that someone, who is armed, comes to save us!
We need these weapons because, as we saw in orlando, those who are armed, and duty bound to help us, might just wait a few hours outside where it’s safe
Furthermore, more than half of America has guns (> 300 million) and they are not running amok.
Interestingly, it’s the liberal democrats who go crazy with guns. Gang bangers are the single biggest violators! Of the shootings of more than 1, most were liberal democrats, gang bangers, or people on SSRIs like prozac, and paxil. Many were depressed demon rock listeners! As we now know many of these killers asked “who’s you god?” Before killing those who were Christians, and Jewish! Liberals want to paint it a conservative thing, but it isn’t! Far from it! It is most definitely a liberal thing! They are the Godless who don’t believe there’s anything after this, and therefore believe there are no consequences for their last action in life!