The question not asked

I am quite sure by now everyone has heard the Senate passed the $2 trillion economic stimulus package to “fight off” the economic crisis brought on by the Wuhan corona virus crisis. Complete bi-partisan support 96-0, no opposition. Shortly after the Senators got the heck out of town. The House, when they(some of them)return to town, has promised swift passage(voice vote), then off to the President to sign. Of course a roll call vote could be forced therefore requiring House members return to D.C. that would slow things down a bit or for quite some time.

Keep in mind that this is the third corona virus package and a fourth is in the works.

Given all of the debate, posturing and the rest that goes along with Congressional “negotiations” I noticed one thing missing that is a mainstay with normal non-crisis partisan debates and posturing.

The question not asked was, How is this going to be paid for?

When it is a partisan plan the other side and their talking heads without fail will ask , How will this be paid for? But this is a bi-partisan plan with no opposition no one cares about the cost or how to pay for it. Not a one has said, Wait a minute we can’t afford that.

Was not all that long ago that a current sitting member of Congress suggested that two $1 trillion coins be minted and placed on deposit with the Federal Reserve. Then I got to thinking, How can you deposit money that you do not have?

That brings me to this. We are told that we as a nation are in debt, a debt that exceeds our GDP. If we are that deep in debt you would think that those in charge of the “purse strings” would be very careful when money must be spent. But they are not, they spend and give away money hand over fist like there is no bottom. We have been told for years that there is a national debt.

Suppose for a minute that there is no national debt. Suppose we have been lied to about that. The recent first time buyers of firearms have been lied to forever and only realized the extent of the lies when they attempted to make their purchase. They say that repeating a lie often enough does not make it a truth, however if you repeat a lie often enough it can be taken for the truth.

We are told we are in debt and swallow that hook, line and sinker. Has anyone out side of government ever seen the balance sheet from the Treasury? Has anyone ever seen the receipts and expenditures from the Treasury?
This little tidbit comes from a speech given by Patrick Henry 07 June 1788. …Another beautiful feature of this Constitution is the publication from time to time of the receipts and expenditures of the public money. This expression, from time to time, is very indefinite and indeterminate. It may extend to a century….

I will add this. It may extend to forever.

While I am here I might as well get this out of the way. Has anyone outside the top echelon of the Federal Reserve ever seen the balance sheet?

And now they know

They ran head first into a brick wall.

By now everyone has heard, seen or read about the “run” on gun stores. From the videos I have seen the stores are pretty much sold out. From what I gather the vast majority of these sales of firearms, accessories and ammunition were to first time buyers.

So I was wondering what was fueling the sudden “need” to have a firearm. Could it be that you now, at long last, know that you are your own best defense?

What were they buying? From what I have seen just about anything and everything. I imagine that the shoppers that got in on this “run” early got pretty much what they wanted. From the looks of it the ones shopping later were buying what was available(leftovers)and then only if there was ammunition available. This might cause you a problem down the line, but something is better than nothing.

Many a first time firearm owner/buyer has come to the stark realization that acquiring a firearm is not as easy as they have been told. From what I hear some of you were taken aback at how difficult and time consuming the whole process can be.

You were told all you had to do was give the clerk some cash and walk out with a firearm. Didn’t work out that way did it? Had to “jump through some hoops” did you? Let’s look a some of the “hoops” you had to jump through after making your selection.

First you had to fill out a form 4473 in which you had to give up a lot of personal information and submit to a background check. If your State has a law requiring a background check for ammunition then you had to submit to that also.

Second the FFL had to make a phone call and wait for approval before the firearm could actually be transferred to you. The system could be overwhelmed and shutdown, operating hours could be reduced, personnel shortages many things could cause that approval to be delayed, no approval no firearm.

Third if your State has a mandatory waiting period you did not walk out with your firearm. You paid for it but you left empty handed. Depending on how long your State requires then you will wait that many days before taking possession.

Fourth if your State requires that you first get a license to purchase a firearm and you did not have that then you just plain did not get to buy a firearm. From what I hear the office that issues that license is closed, thus you are just out of luck.

Fifth if your State is in the “one gun a month club” and you just bought a firearm because it was all that was available then you are going to have to wait a month to buy another firearm. For instance you had every intention of buying a pistol for yourself and found them all gone and all that was left was a single shot 410 shotgun and you bought it because it was the only firearm available with ammunition you will have to wait 30 days for your next purchase in hopes of getting what you really wanted. You may find that by the time your “time-out”has expired there are no pistols left. But at least you have that 410 and as I said something is better than nothing. By the way, if your “time-out” has expired and you finally get to purchase what you really wanted you will have to go through the whole process again, the form, the phone call and the approval, the waiting period it is not a one time ordeal.

Sixth do not forget about the safe storage laws that your State may have.

Seventh if you tried to order a firearm on line and have it delivered to your house you found that it does not work that way either. You are going to need a licensed dealer to complete the transfer, and yes you still have to complete the form and the phone call still must be made and you must wait for approval and do not forget the mandatory waiting period.

All that above are just some of the “hoops” that must be jumped through. Some apply to everyone no matter what State they live in while others are specific to some States.

So I guess you now know that it is not harder to buy a book than a firearm. Did you ever have to fill out a government form to buy a book? Did you ever have to undergo a background check to buy a book? Was there a mandatory waiting period to take possession of your book? Were you ever limited to the number of books you could buy in a month?

I suppose right now the natural inclination would be for me to sit back and laugh at you in your current predicament, but I shall not do that.

If you are a first time firearm buyer/owner I would personally like to welcome you to the community. Congratulations on your purchase. If you are now just old enough to make your first purchase then I want to take this opportunity to wish you a belated Happy Birthday. More on this in a later post.

If you live in a State with a “red flag” law you now are subject.

What you had and have to endure is the product of and result of many years of gun control steps and measures. There are many more in the works. Things like a national registry and mandatory liability insurance on your firearms just to name two.

The gun control zealots, politicians and/or citizens, have been lying for years, lying to all of us, some bought into their lies and others did not.

They lied when they claimed that “gun free zones” were safer. Well until your recent purchase your home was a gun free zone. What was it that caused you to feel not so safe? By the way most of those claiming that gun free zones are safer are surrounded by armed security details whether paid for by the taxpayers or privately funded.

If you are well above the minimum age to buy a firearm and just got around to purchasing a firearm then you have first hand experience at how difficult and time consuming the whole process is. Your eyes are now open and hopefully you now realize that you have been lied too for years. If they have lied so much and for so long about how easy it is to buy firearms, then you need to ask yourselves, What else have they lied about? Well I ask you, Are their lips moving?

I would like to point out that all of these so-called “common sense” gun control measures have had no effect on the criminals. What they have had an effect on is you and your ability to exercise your right, the Right to Keep and Bear arms. Keep in mind there is an election coming.

Not a dimes woth of difference

It has long been said that when it comes to republicans and democrats at the national level there is not a dimes worth of difference between the two. It would appear now that that is also true at the State level.

While all eyes were on Virginia some things have been happening here in Florida. In Virginia the democrats have control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government, and one would kind of expect that they would pursue an anti-gun, anti-liberty and anti-freedom agenda. Here in Florida the republicans have control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government and one would kind of expect them not to pursue an anti-gun, anti-liberty and anti-freedom agenda, but they have.

Our republican controlled State Senate is reportedly working on a series of gun control bills. It was also reported that there was a rather sizeable political contribution from a gun control group. Which brings me to wonder which a politician will respond to, a letter or phone call from a constituent or a sizeable contribution? I think the sizeable political contribution will win every time. Do you really think that you have the politicians ear?

Looks like Virginia has a problem with democrats and their gun control agenda, and Florida has a problem with republicans and their gun control agenda.

By the way, the last round of gun control legislation passed after the mass murder in Parkland here in Florida was with a republican Legislature and a republican Governor. And let us not forget, before all this impeachment nonsense kicked off the President said something about having an “appetite” for some gun control measures. Also some republicans had sided with democrats on gun control measures, and some republican Senators had “instantly” put together national “red flag” proposals with incentives for states that would enact their own red flag laws.

It would seem that the two parties are heading in the same direction when it come to the Second Amendment. The only difference between the two is the speed at which they move.

Living in interesting times

No surprise the democrats voted to impeach the President. Now on to the Senate, provided the Speaker sends the Articles of Impeachment forward.

This post is about another matter, Second Amendment sanctuaries. At last check 85 Counties, 10 Cities and 16 Towns in the Commonwealth of Virginia have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries. This is being done as some democrats in the soon to be democrat controlled government in Virginia have pre-filed some onerous gun control legislation that will come up for a vote once the democrats take control in January 2020. The democrats in Richmond have pretty much painted themselves into a corner with this gun control journey, much the same as the democrats in the US House did with impeachment, they once started could not turn back. Not to mention that a lot of money poured into Virginia from the gun control groups to help elect the democrats. These gun control groups fully expect a return on their expenditures. And just for the record, I do know that the pro-gun groups do the same things. There is a big difference between the two. The anti-gun groups are demanding that the right to keep and bear arms should be severely limited or outright eliminated while the pro-gun groups simply want the right to keep and bear arms left alone. There is another difference the anti-gun groups are more than willing to have the government use force to accomplish their agenda, the pro-gun groups are not demanding the government use force to maintain the right to keep and bear arms.

It would appear that many in Virginia are fed up and these brave citizens are pretty much telling the government in Virginia to “stick it”. The legal and lawful gun owners are sick and tired of being the “whipping boy”, being blamed for the actions of a minute few that do not and will not obey the laws already on the books.

What is the government and indeed the Governor of Virginia going to do? No matter what is done, America will be watching.

They could abandon this course they are planning to embark on. No, they will not do that, no turning back now. They feel as though they were elected on a gun control agenda and as much they believe the must follow through.

They could pass the legislation and sign it into law while knowing full well that that law would not be enforced in the vast majority of the Commonwealth. No they can not do that either. If a law is to be simply ignored and not enforced what good would it be to have laws?

Side road. The latest mantra of the democrats is, “No one is above the law”. How many times have we heard that one used against the President during the impeachment process. They also like to say, “We are a nation of laws” and “The rule of law”. They say this while allowing the recreational use of marijuana is lawful in some leftist sates while their is a federal prohibition against the possession and use of marijuana. Some jurisdictions even profit from the use and sale of marijuana by taxation. Imagine that, profiting and taxing an illegal activity. The left also offers sanctuary in some states and cities for persons in this country illegally. Some allow them to get a drivers license, allow them to vote in local elections, provide welfare and so on. Being in this country without authorization is against federal law, yet they defy federal law and shelter criminals. So much for being a nation of laws and the rule of law. You get no “moral high ground” in this case, even if there were any available which there ain’t.
Just to note, the Federal Government has not “fallen” on the States allowing the use of recreational marijuana and harboring illegal aliens using governmental force to bring them into compliance.

Back to the post. They could pass the legislation, sign it into law and fire(remove from office)any local government official who refused to comply with and enforce the law. Firing a government employee is one thing(though they would be forced to deal with the government employee unions), removing a duly and constitutionally elected government official is quite another. The residents of the counties, cities and towns effected might just get pissed off. Who would be installed in those vacant offices? Seems to me the criminals would be the biggest supporters of this move and benefit the most. I have heard of legislation coming that says refusal to enforce the gun control legislation would be effectively self-terminating from the office which they hold, quitting. They could withhold funds from the locales that refuse to comply. This move would bring about a whole series of calamities.

They could use the Virginia National Guard, as one suggested, to force compliance. How can they be sure that the men and women in the Guard would descend on their fellow Virginians? Are there enough Guardsmen to cover such a large area?

Are they actually contemplating using force, government force, to disarm the citizens of Virginia? Will Lexington and Concord be repeated?

January is closing in.

The Second Amendment sanctuary idea is catching on, perhaps it will spread across the land.

We are living in interesting times.

Why now?

Checked in on the latest from the House impeachment inquiry, read a few news articles, caught a few video clips and listened to a few news and opinion personalities. Pretty much the same as I have done since this circus began. And each day the results are the same, democrats and their allies in the media claiming the most damning evidence has come to light and it is only a matter of time, republicans and their allies in the media saying their is no evidence and it is game over. They all hear and see the same thing and yet come up with different outcomes, amazing.

For three long years the democrats have been looking for a reason, any reason, to remove the president from office. Every path they have taken turned out to be a dead end. Now they have embarked on an impeachment inquiry and have gone down many a rabbit hole on this journey. They have gone past the point of no return, they can not turn back now and save face, nor can their allies in the media, they must push forward. About the only out they have is to claim they have the evidence but it would be pointless to proceed when it would be impossible to get the requisite number of Senators to vote to convict and remove. They could make this claim whether or not they have any evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors, no one would be the wiser.

The “official” impeachment inquiry began with the 2020 election just over a year out and now here we are within a week of Thanksgiving. We are well into the democrat primary season with Iowa in February. I doubt that the House will wrap up this inquiry before Thanksgiving, dragging on until early or mid December. Then Christmas will be approaching, if the Senate takes as long as the House is taking this will drag on well into the new year. When the Senate convenes for this all other business stops and if true as reported the Senate will be in session 6 days a week.

The same question comes up, Why now? There could be many reasons.

Perhaps they began this inquiry knowing full well that it would drag on for sometime. Campaigns will be sidelined for those democrats in the primary contest who happen to be sitting Senators, they will be at work. The only campaigning done for them will be through their surrogates. This gives a decided advantage to those not in the Senate, they will be out campaigning everyday. I doubt very seriously that they will suspend their campaign to show solidarity with their opponents. Perhaps this road was taken knowing it would give a decided advantage to the candidate of their choice. No, the democrats would never interfere with their own primaries or show preference for any candidate.

Perhaps it is the timing. The democrats knew full well that the spending bills to fund the government would not get done in time. After all, when was the last time the Congress actually got the spending bills passed on time or ahead of time for that matter? Once again here we are with a stop gap measure, a continuing resolution, to keep the government open. The democrats could forward their articles of impeachment to the Senate with, let’s say, a week or two until this stop gap measure is set to expire. The Senate could inform the House that they will begin the trial portion after another stop gap measure is approved. The House could inform the Senate that you have ample time to do this and no consideration will be given to a stop gap measure until after the trial. The Senate would be forced into a quick trial and verdict to avoid a government shutdown. 2020 is an election year, if the government suffers it second shutdown in as many years that would be bad for the republicans. If the Senate holds a quick trial to avoid a shutdown the Democrats will blame the republican controlled Senate for not giving fair consideration for the evidence presented to them. Thus the Senate would be caught between a rock and a hard spot. No the democrats would never cause a crisis and blame someone else.

Perhaps it is the crowded primary field. The democrats know that there is not one candidate, in the crowded field that would become the nominee, could defeat the President in the 2020 election. Since they can not beat him they chose to continue their mission of removing him from office.

Perhaps to avoid something. Removing the President has been their goal since day one, the talk of impeachment began when the President was the President-elect. They could have went down this path at any time since January 3rd of this year, yet they waited. Prior to this inquiry, formal inquiry, the President, a republican president, was willing to enact gun control legislation there were several republican members of Congress willing to go along. Some republicans had already teamed with democrats on legislation proposals. The President and the republicans would be going against the dreaded NRA. They could have waited until the republicans had enacted gun control. There was no way the democrats were going to let this happen. They would have lost two of their most important talking and campaign points. They could no longer claim that the republicans were against enacting “common sense” gun control measures, also they could no longer say that the republicans were in the pocket of the NRA. If the President and the republicans in Congress had gotten on the “gun control train” they could have been heroes to the gun control cult. That could have cost the democrats some votes they could not have this happen. So instead of having some republican gun control measures they chose to move ahead with this inquiry. They knew this impeachment inquiry would derail any gun control legislation. Within the past few days some Senators(democrat and republican)were lamenting how this impeachment has derailed gun control talks with the President.

Well anyway the circus continues tomorrow.

What do they have in common?

Red Flag Laws and the current Impeachment Inquiry, what do they have in common? Some would say secrecy and no due process.

Secrecy.

There really is and was no secrecy in the impeachment inquiry unless you count the fact that it began behind closed doors. Even with that the “witnesses” were paraded about in the open. The media seemed to know what they would or might say even before the opening statements were made or questions were asked. Seems like some testimony may have “leaked” out.

It was no secret that the House had launched an impeachment inquiry. It is no secret as to who have been called to testify. Now the impeachment inquiry has moved to the public phase. The whole spectacle is televised and broken up into videos and recordings are made and broken up into soundbites with those on both sides playing the snippets or soundbites that aid their side. The media is right there to tell the public all they “need” to know, “unbiased” of course.

Are red flag cases handled in the same manner? I kind of suspect that the whole process is conducted in secrecy. Witnesses are not paraded about in public. What happens there does not leak out.

The President knew this was coming, it has been in the forefront since the democrats took control of the House. He also knew who testified and knows who will testify. He can watch the spectacle or have others watch it and brief him on what was said or just catch the snippets and sound bites.

Does the person in a red flag case have any idea what is coming his or her way? Can that person watch the proceedings or have others watch it for him or her? Are there any snippets or soundbites? I kind of suspect that the person has no idea what is coming.

Due process.

Is the President right now at this moment getting due process at this stage of the impeachment inquiry? Yes and no.
He does not have his attorney representing him or his interests at the moment, that covers the no part.
He does, however, have the republican members of the House asking questions of the witnesses and there is a staff lawyer, that covers the yes part.

Does the person caught up in a red flag case get due process? The answer is no. He or she is not present at the proceedings, nor is there an attorney present to represent to him or her. In fact only the opposition is present, kind of a one sided trial. The Judge makes the final decision.

While this inquiry is going on the President and his team are preparing themselves.

The person in the red flag case has no way of preparing.

Now moving along to the outcome.
If the House decides to not proceed, that will be televised. The same will be true if the House brings the articles of impeachment up for a vote. The same will be true if the House passes the articles of impeachment and sends them forward to the Senate. The President will immediately know.

The person caught up in a red flag case will only know if the Judge issues an order to seize the persons firearms, and will know very soon. Most likely at a most inconvenient time. If the Judge is not convinced and does not issue the order the person will never know. If the Judge does issue the order, the firearms are seized. He or she gets due process after not before. The person then must go to court in an effort to get his property back. Failing to convince the Judge that he is or she is not a danger to themselves or others will mean that the person will never get their property back, never. By the way the person just lost his or her Second Amendment rights, even though they never committed a crime or had any intention to do so.

By now some of you may be wondering just why I am writing this. Glad you asked.

If you go back to last February and check you will find the President making these two statements or proposals among others.
First. In reference to the school shooting at Parkland and the perpetrator and his interactions with law-enforcement and the perpetrators firearms “Take them away if you have the right or not”.
Second. “Take the guns first then due process”.

So you will pardon me if I do not shed a tear for someone complaining about not getting due process when just last February he was proposing doing away with due process for all legal and lawful gun owners.

They have nothing in common, but they would have something in common if.

Now I could see complaining about no due process if the House held all the hearings in secrecy. Passed the articles in secrecy and passed those articles to the Senate. The Senate did their part in absolute secrecy and convicted the President in secrecy and removed the President. No due process at all. Now the President would have to present himself and plead his case to be restored as President. By the way, he would be pleading to be restored to the same people that had just kicked him out in secrecy. I know that the Office of the President is not anyone’s property, this is just to illustrate a danger of red flag laws.

Is the President going to get a fair shake? I would have to say, NO! Especially when one member of Congress said shortly after getting elected “Now we impeach the mother****er”. How do you think she would vote regardless of the evidence. Not when so many in Congress have already made up their minds and there minds will not be changed regardless of the evidence or the lack of evidence. Not when the media has already convicted him and is doing it’s best to convict him in the court of public opinion.