When Barack Obama told Sarah Brady he was pursuing gun control "under the radar," people began to wonder exactly what he meant. Now, we have a specific example of how a President can abuse his power, overstep his authority, and circumvent the system to enact his own special gun laws.
Under the Obama administration, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives, commonly known as the ATF, has unilaterally passed a new rule that requires firearms dealers in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas to report to the ATF sales to an individual of multiple semiautomatic rifles, greater than .22 caliber, with detachable magazines during any five-day period. The stated purpose of this new law is to limit the flow of firearms from the Untied States to Mexico.
This new rule essentially amounts to a new federal gun-control law; however, it was passed without a single vote in Congress. Barack Obama knew he could never get this sort of gun-control law through both houses of Congress, so he just created the law through executive authority and got in through the backdoor.
One of the most problematic features of this new gun law is that is does not apply equally to all states. American citizens who live in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas are now subject to more federal gun restrictions than those citizens in other states. Since the federal government cannot impose federal laws on specific groups of people, this law is unconstitutional.
We may not have to spend a lot of time worrying about the uneven application of this law on the southern border states, however. If the ATF gets away with this law, they are bound to expand it to more states. Eventually, the Obama administration will argue the law was so effective in curbing illegal gun sales in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas that the gun smugglers have started using buyers in states like Colorado, Nevada, Oklahoma, Utah, etc. Then the ATF will expand the law to other states. Eventually, the law will probably apply to Alaska too. Do not be surprised if Barack Obama and the ATF start claiming people are buying guns in Alaska, putting them on boats, and sailing them down the Pacific coast to Mexico.
A ridiculous part of this new rule is the "greater than .22 caliber" clause. Nearly all firearms, except .22s themselves, are greater than .22 caliber. The ATF probably threw in this clause to give the illusion the ATF is concerned only with high-powered rifles. In reality, this law going after just about any rifle caliber. For example, the ATF has always been very aggressive about targeting, AR-15s, the civilian version of the M16. Standard AR-15s fire .223 (similar to 5.56 NATO). Even though the .223 round is only moderately powerful, when compared to most rifle rounds, the ATF probably set the power threshold so low for this law so they could include AR-15s.
Also note that the ATF is specifically mentioning "detachable magazines" and "semiautomatic" rifles in the rule. This is just code for "assault weapons." The ATF simply does not like people have assault weapons, and those are the first weapons they would abolish if given the chance. That is what they are pursuing with this rule. This rule is what will set the stage for eventually placing stricter controls on the types of guns the ATF does not like.
The most egregious element to all of this ATF reporting business is the hypocrisy. The Obama administration is claiming that too many firearms are ending up in Mexico, but the ATF's "Fast and Furious" program was deliberately allowing actual working firearms to be transferred to Mexican gangs. Obama and the ATF are out panicking everyone about how many US weapons are ending up in the hands of gangs in Mexico when our government was just caught intentionally allowing--and even encouraging--those weapons to flow into Mexico as part of a organized effort. You just can't make this stuff up.
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
May 18, 2011
Secret Service Questions Middle School Boy Without Parental Consent
Timi Robertson of Tacoma, Washington is upset because the Secret Service went to her seventh grade son's school, Truman Middle School, and questioned him without her permission. Thirteen-year-old, Vito LaPinta, claims to have posted on his Facebook site something to the effect that Osama bin Laden was dead and Obama needs to be careful because there could be suicide bombers.
Children, especially younger boys, often have difficulty expressing themselves clearly. It is possible that Vito LaPinta may have phrased his statement awkwardly, and the odd wording is what alarmed the Secret Service, but that does not really matter. Perhaps, Vito LaPinta actually said something threatening.
The problem here is that the Secret Service is going into a child's school, having him pulled out of class, and questioning him without a parent's permission or presence. Why did the Secret Service not just wait a few hours and approach the boy at home? Were they worried the child was going to launch an attack that day? No. The Secret Service approached the boy at school, because they knew they could get away with it there. If they would have gone to the boy's house, his parents would have had an opportunity to refuse questioning and hire a lawyer.
If this situation seems to familiar to you, that probably means you have read about the Gestapo during Germany's Nazi era. The Gestapo was known for questioning people in unexpected situations and questioning children without parental consent. Now, the Secret Service is not the Gestapo, but whatever similarities exist should be noted.
Children, especially younger boys, often have difficulty expressing themselves clearly. It is possible that Vito LaPinta may have phrased his statement awkwardly, and the odd wording is what alarmed the Secret Service, but that does not really matter. Perhaps, Vito LaPinta actually said something threatening.
The problem here is that the Secret Service is going into a child's school, having him pulled out of class, and questioning him without a parent's permission or presence. Why did the Secret Service not just wait a few hours and approach the boy at home? Were they worried the child was going to launch an attack that day? No. The Secret Service approached the boy at school, because they knew they could get away with it there. If they would have gone to the boy's house, his parents would have had an opportunity to refuse questioning and hire a lawyer.
If this situation seems to familiar to you, that probably means you have read about the Gestapo during Germany's Nazi era. The Gestapo was known for questioning people in unexpected situations and questioning children without parental consent. Now, the Secret Service is not the Gestapo, but whatever similarities exist should be noted.
January 9, 2011
Obama Wants Internet ID for Americans
Obama is planning to give the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a system to establish unique Internet identities for people. The National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace is a plan to create a system that will allow participants to establish who they are online through the use of some sort of identification feature. There are many systems that would allow for this identification, such as digital passcode generators, hardware keys, biometric scanners, RFID cards, voice recognition, etc.
The Obama administration is selling this as something that is voluntary and will be driven by the private sector, but the potential for future abuses must be recognized. Certainly, it would be convenient to have a single and secure Internet ID that you could use to access all of your various Internet-based accounts, but this could make you extremely vulnerable to having your entire online life hijacked in one single move.
People are probably not going to feel terribly threatened by this Internet ID program at first. We are going to be told it is for our protection, and it is completely voluntary, but that is not the way things are going to work out in reality.
If this Internet ID program takes hold, here is what is could happen step-by-step.
1) The Internet ID will be introduced. Banks will offer it to clients. People will use it and enjoy the convenience and feeling of security.
2) After a while, some banks will require users to have an Internet ID in order to access their accounts online.
3) Internet IDs will be required by all major banks for online access.
4) Mortgage companies and credit card companies will require customers to use the Internet ID system online.
5) Credit card companies will require the Internet ID be used for online purchases.
6) After several years, Internet IDs will be commonplace. Internet users may even be required to have Internet IDs to use free resources such as Web-based email accounts, social networking sites, blogging sites, etc.
Eventually, what will happen is that many Americans will have all or most of their online lives under one single Internet ID, effectively placing people's online lives under one universal account. It will be very convenient for people. People will just be able to log onto their computers and do everything without the need to worry about passwords and screen names.
Not only will this be convenient for legitimate users, it also going to be very convenient for identity thieves. We are always told systems are hack-proof, but we often find out later some hacker beat the security. Nothing is hack-proof. Right now, it is really a headache if an identity thief steals your credit card number or manages to hack your email account. Now, imagine if a hacker got hold of your Internet ID and was suddenly able to access every single one of your online accounts. Imagine if a thief had access to your bank accounts, credit cards, mortgage, driver license, cell phone, email accounts, Facebook account, Amazon account, and everything else you have. Your online life would suddenly be in the hands of someone else, and you would have very few resources available to you to correct the problem. In cyberspace, you would virtually cease to be your virtual self.
Here is an even scarier thought. Imagine if the you had your entire online life under a single Internet ID, and you had some dispute with the government. What if your tax return got lost in the mail? Imagine how easy it would be for the IRS to get hold of your Internet ID information and freeze all of your accounts until the matter was resolved. What if the Department of Homeland Security mistakenly identified you as a security threat and just decided to shut off your access to all of your online accounts during an investigation?
The potentials for abuse are tremendous. If you use the Internet ID system, know that you will be placing all of your virtual eggs in one basket. If a thief or the government decides to come along and take your basket, where is that going to leave you?
The Obama administration is selling this as something that is voluntary and will be driven by the private sector, but the potential for future abuses must be recognized. Certainly, it would be convenient to have a single and secure Internet ID that you could use to access all of your various Internet-based accounts, but this could make you extremely vulnerable to having your entire online life hijacked in one single move.
People are probably not going to feel terribly threatened by this Internet ID program at first. We are going to be told it is for our protection, and it is completely voluntary, but that is not the way things are going to work out in reality.
If this Internet ID program takes hold, here is what is could happen step-by-step.
1) The Internet ID will be introduced. Banks will offer it to clients. People will use it and enjoy the convenience and feeling of security.
2) After a while, some banks will require users to have an Internet ID in order to access their accounts online.
3) Internet IDs will be required by all major banks for online access.
4) Mortgage companies and credit card companies will require customers to use the Internet ID system online.
5) Credit card companies will require the Internet ID be used for online purchases.
6) After several years, Internet IDs will be commonplace. Internet users may even be required to have Internet IDs to use free resources such as Web-based email accounts, social networking sites, blogging sites, etc.
Eventually, what will happen is that many Americans will have all or most of their online lives under one single Internet ID, effectively placing people's online lives under one universal account. It will be very convenient for people. People will just be able to log onto their computers and do everything without the need to worry about passwords and screen names.
Not only will this be convenient for legitimate users, it also going to be very convenient for identity thieves. We are always told systems are hack-proof, but we often find out later some hacker beat the security. Nothing is hack-proof. Right now, it is really a headache if an identity thief steals your credit card number or manages to hack your email account. Now, imagine if a hacker got hold of your Internet ID and was suddenly able to access every single one of your online accounts. Imagine if a thief had access to your bank accounts, credit cards, mortgage, driver license, cell phone, email accounts, Facebook account, Amazon account, and everything else you have. Your online life would suddenly be in the hands of someone else, and you would have very few resources available to you to correct the problem. In cyberspace, you would virtually cease to be your virtual self.
Here is an even scarier thought. Imagine if the you had your entire online life under a single Internet ID, and you had some dispute with the government. What if your tax return got lost in the mail? Imagine how easy it would be for the IRS to get hold of your Internet ID information and freeze all of your accounts until the matter was resolved. What if the Department of Homeland Security mistakenly identified you as a security threat and just decided to shut off your access to all of your online accounts during an investigation?
The potentials for abuse are tremendous. If you use the Internet ID system, know that you will be placing all of your virtual eggs in one basket. If a thief or the government decides to come along and take your basket, where is that going to leave you?
November 6, 2008
Every Black Jimmy Carter Has a Silver Lining
Barack Obama will probably turn out to be the Black Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter was elected after a very controversial administration as a liberal, family values, intellectual Democrat. Does this sound familiar? Of course, people soon realized how poorly suited Carter was for the job, but America was stuck with him for four years.
This four-year period was a time of tremendous inflation, rampant liberalism, foreign policy humiliations, and domestic despair. This period of suffering and malaise forced conservative Democrats to look outside of their party for relief. In 1980, Reagan soundly defeated Carter, ushered in one of the greatest times in American history, and created the gold standard of conservatism.
Since Obama is so much like Carter, one must wonder if Obama's administration will also be a tremendous failure. If it is, maybe Obama will pave the way for another great conservative. Right now, the only potential shinning candidate on a hill is Sarah Palin. If she doesn't rise to the occasion, maybe Jeb Bush can grow a beard, change his name to Jeb Shrubbery, and try to make it through the election before people figure out he has some famous relatives. Beyond that, it will have to be Joe the Plumber, Ted Nugent, or some sort of reanimated Thomas Jefferson zombie. (Great conservatives are hard to come by these days.)
The point is we had to suffer through four years of Carter to get eight years of Reagan and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Maybe Obama will wake up America (a nation which has been asleep since the fall of Baghdad), and we will get to see another great eight years and the fall of the Chinese Communist government and the Soviet Union II, which will probably be established by Vladimir Putin just after Obama takes the oath of office in January.
"Mr. Putin, tear down that wall again."
This four-year period was a time of tremendous inflation, rampant liberalism, foreign policy humiliations, and domestic despair. This period of suffering and malaise forced conservative Democrats to look outside of their party for relief. In 1980, Reagan soundly defeated Carter, ushered in one of the greatest times in American history, and created the gold standard of conservatism.
Since Obama is so much like Carter, one must wonder if Obama's administration will also be a tremendous failure. If it is, maybe Obama will pave the way for another great conservative. Right now, the only potential shinning candidate on a hill is Sarah Palin. If she doesn't rise to the occasion, maybe Jeb Bush can grow a beard, change his name to Jeb Shrubbery, and try to make it through the election before people figure out he has some famous relatives. Beyond that, it will have to be Joe the Plumber, Ted Nugent, or some sort of reanimated Thomas Jefferson zombie. (Great conservatives are hard to come by these days.)
The point is we had to suffer through four years of Carter to get eight years of Reagan and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Maybe Obama will wake up America (a nation which has been asleep since the fall of Baghdad), and we will get to see another great eight years and the fall of the Chinese Communist government and the Soviet Union II, which will probably be established by Vladimir Putin just after Obama takes the oath of office in January.
"Mr. Putin, tear down that wall again."
November 5, 2008
The Day America Embraced Socialism
On Tuesday, November 04, 2008, America officially embraced Socialism. During much of 2008 government has made sharp intrusions into the private lives of Americans. On Election Day, America had the opportunity to reject or accept this trend. Collectively, America has chosen to accept the march toward Socialism by electing candidates who openly espouse these principles. Most Notably, Barack Obama is a man who is extremely liberal and has been unabashedly Socialist throughout his political career. Now that the voters of America have given Barack Obama their strong support in the form of decisive election victory, America has consciously chosen to embrace Socialism. For all intents and purposes, America is now a Socialist nation. With regards to the American spirit of freedom, this is one of the darkest days in the history of the country. We are the generation of Americans who witnessed liberty die to the sound of thunderous applause.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)