More than 1,000 zombie knives and machetes have been surrendered to one police force as new legislation banning them becomes law.
Avon and Somerset Police said the weapons had been handed in to 15 surrender sites across the region and urged people who still had them to turn them in.
The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.
St. George Tucker Blackstone’s Commentaries 1:App. 300 1803
England and the US have certainly lost much of our liberty, and we are in danger of losing more. It is time to take it back.
With news continuing to filter in about the second assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, the nation’s prominent Democrats expressed relief that Hitler was OK.
Following a busy weekend of making public statements and social media posts clearly identifying Trump as “literally Hitler” and telling the country that he posed a grave threat to the existence of the United States, Democratic leaders quickly made it known how glad they were to find out he was unharmed.
“We’re just glad the greatest threat to democracy is safe,” said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. “I know just an hour or so before he narrowly avoided a second attempt on his life I posted online about how he was leading the charge to destroy America and had to be stopped, but I’m relieved to hear that he wasn’t harmed.”
Harris and Walz can tout their status as gun owners and tip their hats in false homage to the right to keep and bear arms as often as they wish. It’s all subterfuge.
Another tidbit from the same article I found interesting:
In 2008 Harris joined an amicus brief defending complete bans on the possession of handguns and advocating for a 20th century revisionist view of the Second Amendment that renders it little more than a superfluous authorization of state National Guard units.
A complete ban? I wonder if that was before or after Heller. The distinction may be important at her trial.
An Alaska man was charged and arrested Wednesday for sending numerous graphic and violent messages through a public Supreme Court communications portal that threatened to injure and kill six justices, according to court filings and the Justice Department.
Some of the messages, according to court filings, used the N-word in threats to “lynch” a justice – identified in the filings as “Supreme Court Justice 1” – while also threatening the justice’s “insurrectionist wife.” Other messages refer to shooting another justice – identified “Supreme Court Justice 2” – and killing his wife, and another alleged message threatened six justices total, saying that they should “be AFRAID very AFRAID to leave their home and fear for their lives everyday.”
“WE NEED MASS ASSASSINATIONS. If you’re corrupt you’re corrupt,” said one of the messages, one of more than 465 that Anastasiou allegedly sent to the Supreme Court.
…
The references to Justice 1’s wife and the racial slurs in those messages suggest that justice is Justice Clarence Thomas.
An Alaska man has been indicted on charges that he sent racist and violent threats against six Supreme Court justices and their family members.
…
They became increasingly more menacing this past January, including threats to assassinate the judges. Anastasiou also allegedly made lynching threats and used the N-word in statements aimed at a justice identified as “Supreme Court Justice 1” in the indictment, apparently referring to Clarence Thomas, who is Black.
The messages also included racial, homophobic and misogynistic slurs, the filings show.
Racist: Check. Fan of Lynching: Check Violent Threats: Check
The next time you see a social media post from a military veteran who claims to support banning certain firearms or any other infringement of our civil rights, realize they may be getting paid to violate their oath.
An email obtained last week by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project revealed that the “precision micro-influencer” marketing firm People First is hiring veterans to serve as paid social media influencers for the Harris-Walz campaign.
Pape surveyed more than 2,000 Americans in late June, before the first attempt on Trump’s life on July 13. The survey found a disturbing willingness, across the political spectrum, to say that violence was warranted to eliminate political foes.
The poll, from the Chicago Project on Security & Threats, released in June, showed that 6.9% of Americans — or the equivalent of 18 million adults — believed that it was justified to use force to restore Trump to the White House. In another question, 10% of Americans — or the equivalent of 26 million adults — said they believed political violence is justified to prevent Trump from becoming president again.
The ratio of people on the left willing use violence compared to people on the right in consistent with my hypothesis.
With 26 million people believing violence is justified to stop Trump from reaching office we should expect assassination attempts every few weeks. And every attempt against Trump increases the likelihood of an attempt on Harris.
Remember, the spark that started WW1 was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. A civil war could easily be sparked by a political assassination in this country.
A man with an AK-style rifle pointed the firearm’s muzzle into Donald Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida, as the former president was playing a round, prompting the U.S. Secret Service to open fire, according to three law enforcement officials.
The FBI is investigating what it called an “attempted assassination” of former President Donald Trump after Secret Service agents fired at a man with an AK-47 on or near Trump’s Florida golf course on Sunday.
A spokesperson for Donald Trump‘s campaign said the former president is “safe.” Law enforcement sources told ABC News a suspect is in custody.
Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said the gunman was 300 to 500 yards away from the former president when he was spotted. Secret Service agents fired and the suspect dropped the gun and fled, a senior law enforcement official told ABC News. It was not clear if the suspect was aiming his weapon at Trump.
The source said the suspect got into a vehicle and witnesses reported the license plate number which was tracked by authorities. The suspect was stopped and taken into custody.
Even at 300 yards a semi-auto AK has pretty low odds of connecting with a single fatal shot. But it sounds like the suspected assassin may have been waiting for Trump to get closer.
A gunman was captured Sunday after apparently trying to shoot former President Donald Trump at a golf course in Florida.
Trump is OK, and no injuries were reported by authorities after Secret Service agents fired at the gunman they spotted in the bushes.
Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said the incident took place about 1:30 while the former president was golfing at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach.
They immediately sealed off the area, after Secret Service agents fired four to six rounds at the gunman.
The agents were a couple of holes ahead of where the former president was playing when they spotted a rifle barrel sticking out of the course shrubbery.
I could make a lot of speculative comments but I’m going to let the story develop more before saying what Trump supporters are probably already thinking.
As we enter the homestretch of the 2024 election, Harris is trying to pull off the greatest magic trick in the history of American politics. She is attempting to make the Biden-Harris administration disappear. She wants to convince voters that she and President Biden had nothing to do with the last three-and-a-half years.
More than that, Harris seemingly wants to pretend that Trump is somehow the incumbent president, and that she is the upstart “change” candidate fighting against the failed policies of the last three-and-a-half years. It is surreal to say the least.
It is a slick sleight of hand doomed to fail, because people will believe their “lying eyes.” For tens of millions of voters, the number one failure of the Biden-Harris administration is the economy, quickly followed by immigration, crime and health care. These voters will tie the incumbent vice president to those failures.
Harris, elitist Democrats, academics, media personalities and celebrities existing in entitled bubbles of luxury and personal safety can embrace Jan. 6, Roe v. Wade, etc. all they want, but this election is still going to come down to the bread-and-butter issues of the economy, immigration, crime and affordable and reliable healthcare.
And on that score, it will be the Americans living paycheck-to-paycheck who will push Trump over the top to victory in November.
A falsehood they have a significant investment in.
Celebrities pontificating on subjects they know nothing about.
A comforting falsehood, even when the uncomfortable truth is obvious.
I don’t think anyone can reliably know what will happen in the next few weeks before the election to predict anything better than they can predict the flip of a coin.
Furthermore, a good case can be made that it is not a fair coin, and a probable T side result will be reversed in the dark of the night to show an H.
In last night’s three-on-one debate the ABC News moderators used misleading crime data from the FBI to ‘fact check’
@realDonaldTrump. The reality is that Trump (as he usually is) was right – crime is not down – it is up, way up. Kamala Harris and her willing accomplices in the mainstream media would have you believe that violent crime in America is at a 50-year low, a narrative eagerly parroted by so-called fact-checkers at Politifact and now ABC News. The reality, however, is far from what they claim. The only thing at a 50-year low is the integrity of violent crime data. Less than a year after taking office, Biden-Harris’s administration had the FBI dismantle the long-standing crime reporting system, replacing it in 2021 with a new, ‘woke’ system that is optional for state and local law enforcement agencies to use. As a result, at least 6,000 law enforcement agencies aren’t providing data, meaning that 25% of the country’s crime data is not captured by the FBI. This deliberate underreporting skews the statistics, painting a falsely optimistic picture of public safety while real Americans continue to suffer from rising crime rates.
Democrat-controlled cities from New York to San Francisco have effectively decriminalized violent crime. For instance, in New York City, 52% of violent felony cases are downgraded to misdemeanors, and offenders are typically offered diversion agreements that keep these offenses out of crime statistics. This manipulation alone could account for a 50% or more drop in reported violent crimes in the Big Apple. Across the country, Soros-backed prosecutors are refusing to prosecute violent criminals or downgrading their charges in record numbers. This systematic underreporting and leniency are tactics used by Democrats to create a misleading narrative about public safety, while communities continue to suffer from unchecked crime. It’s not far-fetched to imagine that the Biden-Harris regime and the Democrats replaced the FBI’s universal crime data system with a new optional system to fabricate this massive decrease in ‘reported’ crime. The move raises serious questions about their motives and the integrity of the data. Of course, the Democrats will argue that the new system is more inclusive, allowing law enforcement agencies to record pronouns and gender identities, including transgender and nonbinary, as well as the sexual preferences of both criminals and victims. The timing and optional nature of the new system suggest an ulterior motive: to obscure the real rise in crime and present a false narrative of improvement under Democratic leadership.
Additionally, we know that the 70 Soros-backed prosecutors, representing 72 million Americans and half of the nation’s 50 most populous cities and counties, have made it their mission to implement so-called restorative justice. This approach often means refusing to prosecute violent criminals based on factors such as race and gender identity. The few criminals they do prosecute almost always have their violent felonies downgraded to misdemeanors. Both of these realities—the new optional reporting system and the restorative justice efforts—have led to violent crime data that fails to reflect the true state of our communities since 2021. These manipulations distort public perception and allow Democrats to promote a false sense of security. National polls reveal that most Americans believe crime has increased significantly over the past four years. The situation is even more dire in large Democrat-controlled cities, where almost all residents report a massive surge in crime. Most residents even report that they or someone in their family has been a victim of crime. Take Chicago, for example. Every weekend, approximately 70 people are shot. The crisis has escalated to such an extent that the mayor recently canceled the city’s contract with a company that detects and reports gunfire. There are so many gunshots in Chicago that police can only respond if someone is actually hit by a bullet. New York City is similarly experiencing a huge spike in robberies and assaults, often occurring in broad daylight. The situation became so severe this year that the governor had to deploy National Guard troops to the NYC subway system to deter criminals. Before District Attorney Alvin Bragg and Attorney General Letitia James took office, these violent crimes would have been prosecuted as felonies. Now, if they are prosecuted at all, they are often downgraded to misdemeanors with diversion deals. There is also ample evidence that the FBI and the Biden-Harris regime are simply cooking the books. Watch Jesse Waters expose what he calls Enron-style corruption in their crime reporting. The next time someone tries to tell you that Biden and Harris have reduced crime to its lowest levels in 50 years, let them know the truth. It’s easy to claim a decrease in crime when you leave out data from 25% of the population living in major cities like Los Angeles and New York City. The reality is, these omissions paint a misleading picture of the state of crime in America. Don’t let them gaslight you with manipulated statistics. Demand full transparency and accountability in crime reporting to get the real story.
Candidate Harris and her co-conspirators claim crime is at a 50-year and the gun control she and Biden implemented are responsible for this. That Biden and Harris are responsible for the violent crime rate is at least partially true. But it is not something to be proud of.
‘Tim Walz and I are both gun owners. We’re not taking anybody’s guns away. So stop with the continuous lying about this stuff,’ she said during the debate with former President Donald Trump.
Did you hear that? She is one of us! Yay!!!!
But, of course, the way you can tell she is lying is that her lips are moving. From the same article:
During the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, Harris proposed a series of gun control policies, even backing a controversial government-run mandatory gun buyback program.
She detailed her position in an MSNBC forum on gun safety in October 2019.
‘We have to have a buyback program, and I support a mandatory gun buyback program,’ she said.
Harris warned there were already estimates of up to 10 million assault weapons in the United States.
‘We’re going to have to have smart public policy that’s about taking those off the streets, but doing it the right way,’ she said.
“Mandatory gun buyback”? She can’t “buyback” something she didn’t sell us. Of course, the phrase really means they will take our tax money at gun point, give some of it back it to us as an inadequate payment for the guns they are forcibly taking from us and will then tell us we should be thankful they gave us some of our money back.
Hey, Gwen. You and your husband picked June 4th, the day of Tiananmen Square Massacre, as your wedding day and went to Tiananmen Square for your wedding anniversary.
Don’t pretend that you don’t know what a tyrannical government can do to a disarmed population!!
You want to eradicate our Constitutional right to bear arms. You are a Communist and a threat to our Republic!!!
Theirs is a rot that goes deeper than the marrow of their bones.
There may have been a time when the Left in the US had some integrity to their belief but decades of embracing the premeditated death of innocents have corrupted their souls to where no vice is too low for them to commit in their pursuit of power.
I used to wonder how the Nazis or the NKVD/KGB killers could be so beastial in their actions, but reading how they didn’t spring from the maw of Charon fully formed but rather they gave away their souls bit by bit in exchange for a modicum of power and bread, I see that this is where we find ourselves today.
Our foes on the left would gladly kill any of us if it means they could rule over the abattoir.
I don’t know how things will turn out. I see too many paths depending on too many variables to make any kind of prediction or to have a significant influence. I have resigned myself to giving whatever nudge I can in the direction of fair and just trials for the perpetrators. But mass psychology being what it is, and the thin veneer of rationality our species has means that is likely a low probability outcome.
There is no legitimate basis for the Fourth Circuit to have concluded that the most widely owned semiautomatic rifles in the United States are not arms protected by the Second Amendment.
The Court must provide more guidance on which weapons the Second Amendment covers and they should do so in this case. This immoral and abusive gun control regime must end here.
The DNC Platform states that the Democrats are determined to establish national universal background checks and red flag laws to keep guns out of the hands of people deemed a danger to themselves and others. According to the platform, the party also wants a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, to require safe storage of guns and end the gun industry’s immunity from liability “so gunmakers can no longer escape accountability.
“And, because the gun violence epidemic is a public health crisis, we will fund gun violence research across the Centers for Disease Control [CDC] and National Institutes of Health [NIH] as well as community violence interventions,” the DNC platform states.
It is good they make this so clear. It makes it more difficult for them to get away with claiming they “support the Second Amendment”. Plus, should the occasion arise, it can be used as evidence at their trials.
Between 2017 and 2021, a total of 1,074,022 firearms were reported stolen in the U.S., averaging around 200,000 annually. However, these figures are estimates, as criminals typically do not report their illicit activities to law enforcement agencies for research purposes.
While this number seems exceptionally high, the truth is that less than a fraction (only 0.042%) of civilian-owned firearms in the United States are stolen each year. Therefore, it is safe to say that the vast majority of gun owners are, in fact, taking precautions to ensure thieves do not acquire their property.
Stolen guns in America are used in a significantly higher number of crimes than legally purchased firearms. However, many stolen guns are never used in crimes.
When a cable TV news actor cites some farcical statistic about guns or gun owners, it’s important to understand how that number made it onto the teleprompter. It starts with donor dollars sent to researchers at left-leaning colleges, universities or other groups, who publish reports that mirror their donors’ views, which are then regurgitated by the corporate media. It’s a factory-like process. We don’t have anything like that. We don’t need it. We simply rely upon the truth.
A new ruling from the the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals now will prevent California’s law limiting gun purchases to one every 30 days from taking effect.
While a federal district court had issued an injunction against the law, California sought a stay against the injunction via the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit issued a stay, reversing its stay after hearing oral arguments on the case.
The earlier federal district court injunction against the law now goes into full effect, preventing the law from being enforced.
…
California cited gun restrictions and taxes, and licensing laws targeting Native Americans as evidence of historical precedent for its case, leading Hayes to write limits on Native American sales — and other “groups excluded from the political community” as a historical analogue is “dubious, at best,” and that the presented historical laws did not include a “limit on the quantity or frequency with which one could acquire firearms.
…
Hayes placed a 30 day stay on the ruling pending an appeal, which is now complete, meaning Hayes’ judgment takes effect.
They can be very creative in their efforts to infringe upon our rights, so it will be interesting to see how California attempts to create a new law to get around this ruling. With the Bruen decision they said, paraphrasing, okay, we have to give carry licenses, but every place in a city, outside of your own home, is a “sensitive place” and the carry license does not apply.
As an example of their creativity:
California cited gun restrictions and taxes, and licensing laws targeting Native Americans as evidence of historical precedent for its case, leading Hayes to write limits on Native American sales — and other “groups excluded from the political community” as a historical analogue is “dubious, at best,” and that the presented historical laws did not include a “limit on the quantity or frequency with which one could acquire firearms.
I’m surprised they didn’t include the laws put in place by the KKK prohibiting people with black skin from firearm ownership as justification. Democrats got away with that kind of crap 100+ years ago, so why not try it again?
Amid the alliance’s continued efforts to create a SWIFT alternative, the economic alliance has sought to create its very own BRICS payment system. It will play a major role in the alliance trade dealings. Specifically, allowing unilateral settlement to be done without the need for the US dollar.
The move is poised to be vital for the bloc and participating nations, and it appears there will be a lot of them. According to one Russian official, there are already 159 countries seeking to adopt the system currently. With a potential launch coming in October, it could have massive global market ramifications.
I’m not an economist, I have never even taken a class on economics. So maybe my concerns are imaginary, but I could see a large number of those dollars being used by other countries returned to the U.S. How many dollars?
As much as one-half of the value of U.S. currency is estimated to be circulating abroad.
…
As of December 31, 2020, there was $2,040.7 billion in circulation, totaling 50.3 billion notes in volume.
From that same source we find that in 2022 there was $2,259.3 trillion in circulation. Using a bit of extrapolation and rounding we end up with about $1.2 trillion outside the U.S. in 2024. So, what happens if a substantial number of those dollars come back to the U.S.? It would seem to me that just one or two percent ($12 to $24 billion) would cause noticeable inflation. And then what? More people/countries would want to get rid of their dollars before they lose value due to inflation. It is a run on U.S. goods and property (land) to get something for those dollars. It is the dump of $1.2 trillion dollars all wanting something for their rapidly decreasing in value dollars. The GDP of the U.S. in 2023 was over $27 trillion. But GDP:
aggregates all private and public consumption, investment, government outlays and net exports.
The export portion of our GDP is about 10% of our total GDP, or $2.7 trillion. Not all of that $1.2 trillion would go into exporting of goods, but half or more into the export market would make for “interesting times.” And it would happen, as Ernest Hemingway famously said about bankruptcy, “Gradually, then suddenly.”
