A Florida man has become the first person in the state to have his due process removed and his guns taken before he was determined to be mentally unfit and before he was accused of a crime.
The post It Begins: Florida Police Now Confiscating Guns From People With No Due Process appeared first on The Free Thought Project.
Using a new law, Seattle police raided a man"s home and confiscated his guns with zero due process for entirely legal behavior.
The post It Begins: Seattle Cops Conduct Nazi-Style Gun Confiscations: No Laws Broken, No Charges, No Arrests appeared first on The Free Thought Project.
Donald Trump called for the removal of due process -- by taking guns first and forcing people to prove their innocence to get them back -- and nearly all of his supporters are ignoring this most blatant attack on the constitution.
The post The Right’s Failure to Call Out Trump on Gun Control Proves Brainwashing Power of 2-Party Paradigm appeared first on The Free Thought Project.
25 years ago, the United States government used accusations of illegal gun parts to raid a church, the resultant raid left 82 men, women, and children dead.
The post Never Forget, The US Gov’t Slaughtered Dozens in a Church Over an Illegal Gun Part appeared first on The Free Thought Project.
Hopefully, the comments by president Donald Trump are a wakeup call for all Americans, as his statements should have all but sealed his fate in 2020. Look forward to an overly leftist dictator for president in the next election cycle, although it won’t be much different than how Trump is acting now.
Just spewing the nonsense about confiscating law-abiding citizens guns before due process should be enough to send Trump packing in 2020. The way Trump is acting, we might as well have elected Hillary Clinton, or just given Barack Obama a third term. Unfortunately, people don’t seem to understand that we aren’t free and the government will do what it wants regardless of the rules it laid out for itself in the Constitution.
Laura Ingraham even tweeted that should he start coming for fundamental rights, he won’t have to worry about being reelected in 2020.
If the President @realDonaldTrump dives on the 2nd Am he won’t have to worry abt who runs his 2020 campaign.
— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) March 1, 2018
In the White House meeting with lawmakers of both parties, Trump endorsed multiple new gun control measures, including confiscating guns before due process, breaking with Republican lawmakers and throwing his support behind some proposals the National Rifle Association (NRA) opposes.
“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time,” Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence. “Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said. That statement is nothing less than Trump declaring he’s a tyrant and the comment itself proudly declares Trump as an egregious violator of basic fundamental human rights.
But after the Las Vegas shooting, SHTFPlan warned not to get too comfortable with your rights based on Trump’s history of gun comments.
Back in 2000, Trump laid out his views on gun control. In a page-long explanation of his stance on guns in his book The America We Deserve. Trump assessed the differences between the two main political parties’ gun policies. He called what he said was the Democratic party‘s desire to “confiscate” guns “a dumb idea” and said Republicans “refuse even limited restrictions,” noting that they “walk the NRA line.” Instead, he cast his stance as something of a middle ground. “I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I also support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun,” he wrote. And if that isn’t evidenced enough, Trump also agreed with Barack Obama, one of the most anti-gun presidents in modern history, after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. –SHTFPlan
Maybe this is the wakeup call we all need to prove the government doesn’t care about our rights. It doesn’t matter who is elected, or what we expect them to do. Trump’s comments should be raising all kinds of red flags right now, and we don’t want to say we told you so, but, we told you so:
Dismissing Trump’s statements outright is simply for those who don’t know what his stance on guns was BEFORE he campaigned for the presidency and how wishy-washy he can be on the issue. Those who do know, are not being so calm about his comments. Of course, there’s no real reason to be up in arms (no pun intended) just yet, because nothing has been proposed, but it isn’t hard to see it popping up, and soon. –SHTFPlan, October 2017
This hasn’t been a government for or by the people for over 100 years (if not more) and it’s only getting worse. Those in power see themselves as rulers and don’t care about anything except the expansion of their own authority over others. We should stop putting our trust in the government and begin relying on ourselves because it will only worsen from here. It feels like Barack Obama’s third term just started.
Trump: ‘Take the guns first, go through due process second’ [More]
That’s called “tyranny.” No prominent Democrat would be allowed to get away with saying that without enraging every gun owner rights advocate out there.
You don’t have enough enemies who want to see you impeached and even imprisoned?
I strongly suggest you rethink what you just blurted out and then explain yourself in detail and apologize for misspeaking, because if that wasn’t just running your mouth before thinking it through, you’ve just put yourself on equal footing with the worst of them.
Due process as an afterthought, Mr. President? How about if we have Mueller do that with you?
Photo credit: screen shot from video here
The post David Codrea – There’s a Word for That! appeared first on Oath Keepers.
Every driver who was issued a red light camera ticket in New Miami, Ohio will be refunded after an appeals court ruled the fines to be unconstitutional.
The post VICTORY! Court Finds Red Light Camera Fines ‘Unconstitutional’—Forces City to Refund ALL Tickets appeared first on The Free Thought Project.
Attorney says FBI violaitng privacy, due process and equal protection by secretly using personal information from the ATF Form 4473 for the unauthorized purpose of checking gun buyers against the Terror Screening Database.
“FBI admits unauthorized program against American gun owners,” attorney and policy analyst Paloma Capanna charged in an update on Robinson vs. Sessions, a lawsuit on civil rights violations resulting from matches on the “No-Fly List.”
“The US DOJ Attorneys admitted in their Answering Brief that the FBI screens ‘all’ Americans seeking to lawfully purchase a firearm against the Terrorist Screening Database (“TSDB”) upon submission of the ATF Form 4473,” Paloma wrote, quoting:
“Since 2004, as part of its background checks for all potential firearms purchasers, the NICS has searched a file containing a list of known or suspected terrorists that is exported by the Terrorist Screening Center from the TSDB into the FBI’s National Crime Information Center database.”
Back in 2015 then-Director James Comey testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and made it sound like an exception where FBI was “alerted” and “notified.” Additionally, in his exchange with Sen. Chuck Grassley, he noted “There are a variety of things that we do when we are notified that someone on our known or suspected terrorist database is attempting to buy a firearm,” up to and including stopping the transaction, placing a suspect under surveillance, or arrest.
We’ve discussed the danger of using such lists, developed in secret from undisclosed sources of unknown (to the public) reliability. We’ve also seen how flight denials can be based on mistakes, as happened to the late Sen. Edward Kennedy. How many Americans have such resources and connections to be able to expeditiously clear matters up? We’ve also seen serious National Instant Check System flaws, and how “Virtually all of those denied purchasing a gun are false positives.”
We’ve seen Joint Terrorism Task Force triggers as bafflingly all-encompassing as defending the Constitution, supporting liberty candidates and ideals, sporting such apparel or bumper stickers, paying in cash, shaving your beard, and traveling an “illogical” distance to a gun-related event. We’ve seen the sorry state of bureaucratic overreach and infringements devolve into the even more ridiculous, as with the Pennsylvania man placed on a watch list after regularly taking a giant inflatable pink pig to political rallies.
Those demanding gun purchases be halted because of secret lists of unknown accuracy, administered by faceless bureaucrats with unknown sympathies and motives, are essentially advocating for a police state, where fundamental rights can be denied without due process. And face it—if you were a terrorist, and were further inclined to buy a gun “legally,” wouldn’t a NICS denial be a pretty good indication that you’ve been made, and allow you to evade and respond with countermeasures?
Paloma’s revelation adds the further troubling dimension of a federal agency involving itself in an area where it has no legal authorization to do so. But in the absence of a provable denial, having standing to stop the practice in court could be problematic, protracted and expensive. Nonetheless, Paloma maintains all gun purchasers subjected to NICS have been harmed:
“[T]he violation of their civil rights begins the moment the FBI secretly uses their personal information from the ATF Form 4473 for the unauthorized purpose of checking them against the TSDB … Robinson vs. Sessions is about Privacy – the confidentiality of the personal information submitted on the ATF Form 4473. It’s about Due Process – including that neither the ATF nor the FBI tells you what they’re doing with your personal information. It’s about Equal Protection – because American gun owners are the only category or class singled out for discriminatory treatment as being the most likely group responsible for terrorist acts carried out with a firearm.”
An alternative way to stop this would be by having Congress intervene. Such efforts take time and are fraught with delays and resistance, and the current crop of do-nothing Republicans caving to obstructionist Democrats means relief is not something we can count on.
Still, there is one person who can cut through the red tape with a stroke of the pen. Donald Trump owes his presidency to gun owners. The FBI reports to AG Sessions who reports to him. He has authority to issue an executive order and stop the unauthorized practice today.
Unless he hears from a lot of concerned gun owners, most who will remain unaware of this issue thanks to deliberate indifference outside of a niche liberty advocacy readership, don’t count on it.
Also see:
—–
If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work. You can donate HERE.
—–
David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”
This is not supposed to happen in America and it’s in direct conflict with the oath everyone behind it took. (Repeal719.com)
“I know that many in Oregon are VERY upset that SB 719 passed,” Republican State Representative Bill Post announced Thursday. “Therefore a group of us are working to repeal it via the ballot. We need your help.”
SB 719? That’s a new edict that specifies:
“A law enforcement officer or a family or household member of a person may file a petition requesting that the court issue an extreme risk protection order enjoining the person from having in the person’s custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a deadly weapon.”
Without even being charged with a crime, let alone convicted… Think of the potential incentives for abuse. And then think of the expense it would take for someone falsely accused to fight allegations, and the amount of “sympathy” or even basic justice to expect from an overwhelmingly “progressive” Oregon “justice” system.
Think of how “guilty until proven innocent” stands against everything right and just. And Constitutional.
How is Boquist’s disarmament bill consistent with his oath? (Brian Boquist/Facebook)
Another maddening thing is the bill was sponsored by “Republican” Sen. Brian Boquist, who colluded with the most militant Democrat gun-grabbers in the legislature, turning his back on gun-owning constituents who previously had supported his bids for political power. His response to the suicide of his stepson was to infringe on the rights of everybody else. Decent people can sympathize with tragedy, but that’s not an excuse to use that to infringe on their rights. His response to criticism for his turning coat was to accuse representatives of the National Rifle Association and Oregon Firearms Federation of not caring “about veterans blowing their brains out.”
“As you know, the Governor has signed the Boquist/Burdick gun confiscation bill,” OFF told supporters in a Saturday alert. “What you might not know is how few of our friends in law enforcement are even aware of it. When the courts begin ordering the seizure of guns from people who have committed no crime, things are going to get real ugly in Oregon. So it’s time to go to work.”
Oregon gun owners can do that by visiting Repeal719.com and singing the petition as well as circulating petitions and collecting signatures from other Oregon voters, being mindful of the rules and the law to ensure signatures are valid. There’s also a need for volunteers to help verify signatures and for donations to the Repeal 719 PAC.
If you’re not from Oregon, your help is still welcome and needed. While you won’t be able to sign the petition, you can still support your brothers and sisters in arms there financially, by spreading the word and by promoting the group’s social media awareness and advocacy campaign. If Oregon gun-grabbers can get away with this there, it will confirm to gun-grabbers everywhere that it works. They’ll be trying it again wherever the right blood dance opportunity shows that a well financed billionaire/media Astroturf campaign pays off — including where you live.
—–
If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work. You can donate HERE.
—–
David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”
The US Constitution applies to US citizens, and the amendments known as the Bill of Rights guarantee due process as a protection of US citizens’ civil liberties. That’s the theory but not the practice.
Trump’s travel ban applies to non-US citizens, primarily to refugees from the Bush/Obama bombings of numerous Muslim countries. Some of these refugees, whose families and countries were destroyed by American troops, could harbor feelings of revenge against Americans. The Ninth Circuit Panel’s injunction against Trump’s executive order gives the Constitution’s protection of US citizens to non-citizens, apparently on the basis of due process and religious discrimination arguments. The panel of judges said that Trump’s executive order “runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.”
So too does bombing numerous Muslim countries over the course of the past 16 years, about which nothing has been done. One would think that, with the Democratic Party’s merger with Identity Politics and with the liberal/progressive/left leaning of the Ninth Circuit, more of a stink would have been raised about bombing Muslims gratuitously than by placing a mere ban on their entry into the US. But it all depends on who does the bombing and who does the ban. Identity Politics requires “America’s First Black President” to be supported at all costs, and Trump, a white heterosexual male billionaire, to be hated at all costs.
Dear readers, note that the US federal courts roll out the Constitution in order to protect non-citizens from a president’s executive order preventing their entry into the US, but refused to protect the constitutional rights of American citizens from arbitrary indefinite detention and execution without due process.
The fact that constitutional rights no longer apply to citizens, only to non-citizens has evoked no comment from the liberal/progressive/left, from the Democratic Party, from Harvard Law School, from the American Bar Association, or from the Federalist Society. Not from anyone, and for my reward for telling the truth Harvard University Library has published a large list of “False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and Satirical ‘News’ Sources” on which paulcraigroberts.org is included. http://guides.library.harvard.edu/fake
Harvard’s library does not say where the list came from or why the list is credible. I am on the list for “bias” and “conspiracy.” The “bias” means that I do not accept the Ruling Establishment’s self-serving explanations, and “conspiracy” means that I report on the findings of the 3,000 highrise architects and structural engineers who comprise A&E for 9/11 Truth, the Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, and the Scientists for 9/11 Truth, all of whom are far more knowledgeable about 9/11 than the Harvard librarian or the Harvard faculty.
Americans, and apparently Harvard’s library, are unaware that hardly any of the experts who have chosen to speak out about the official 9/11 story, including those First Responders inside the two towers, believe a word of the official story. Harvard’s librarians are apparently so ill-read that they are unfamiliar with books by the 9/11 Commission’s chairman, vice chairman and legal counsel, who wrote that information was witheld from the 9/11 Commission and that the Commission was “set up to fail.” Harvard’s librarian is apparantly unfamiliar with the testimony of demolition experts that the buildings came down as a result of controlled demolition. Harvard’s librarian is apparently ignorant of the panel of scientists headed by a University of Copahagen nano-chemist who reported finding both reacted and unreacted nano-thermite in the dust of the twin towers and who offered their samples for confirmation by other scientists.
Harvard University has no interest in truth. Harvard’s sole interest is to remain a member of the Ruling Establishment. As that requires telling lies, Harvard will tell lies. Lies bring Harvard riches, making Harvard so rich that, as Ron Unz argues, Harvard does not need to charge tuition and does so only out of greed.
Decades ago my University of California, Berkeley, economics professor became Dean of Arts and Sciences at Harvard. My term paper for the course had been published in the prestigeous journal, Classica et Medievalia. Years later when he learned that my book, The Supply-Side Revolution, had passed the peer-review process of Harvard University Press and was slated for publication, he sent for me.
He said that he wanted to have me appointed to the Harvard economics faculty, because the university’s belief in econometrics had proven false and the economics faculty needed a broad-based person such as myself to bring the subject back to life in the real world. I wished him good luck and wondered how a dean this naive had survived at Harvard.
For the dean at Harvard, my work was a strong point. I was the first to explain the Soviet economy both as an organizational system and in terms of the original Marxist asperations. I had reformulated the Pirenne Thesis, and my reformulation had been included into reading texts used in courses in medieval history and urban economics. I had produced new insights into economic policy and had identified regulation as a factor of production. My macroeconomic contributions had corrected the Keynesian deficiencies and extended the role of relative prices into macroeconomics. This seminal work had passed the peer-review process of Harvard University Press and resulted in the publication of my book, The Supply-Side Revolution, recently republished in the Chinese language in China, but still derided by American ignoramuses as “trickle-down economics.”
Harvard University Press kept The Supply-Side Revolution in print for decades. Despite this fact, even people I highly respect, such as Michael Hudson and Lewis Lapham, have no idea what supply-side economics is about and misrepresent it as some kind of preferment for the rich, which shows the power of the Establishment to control the understanding of even highly intelligent people.
To get back to the story. My appointment to Harvard’s economic faculty was blocked by the economic department’s resistance on the basis that I was too disruptive of the orthodoxy. Me and Michael Hudson.
The othodoxy has a large investment in human capital in protecting the rights of the one percent to plunder the rest of us. Those academics who support this plunder are the ones who prosper in the American acadamy, just as the presstitutes who lie for a living do in the American media.
So here I am, a peer-reviewed and published Harvard University Press author and peer-reviewed Oxford University Press author, whose books are now available in Chinese (2), Russian, German (3), Czech, Turkish, French, Spanish (2) and Korean, a person who has held the highest security clearances and once had subpoena power over the CIA, who has the French Legion of Honor, who has the US Treasury’s Silver Medal, who has letters of thanks from President Reagan for my contributions to US eonomic policy, who is asked to speak all over the world, who was Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University for decades, the William E. Simon Chair of Political Economy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University for 12 years, Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal, columnist for Business Week and the Scripp Howard News Service, etc., and so on, and some dumbshit at the Harvard library posts a list that says I am a suspect source of information.
This is the world we live in. Even the most prestigeous institutions are utterly corrupt. No one is there for the American people or for truth, or for anything or anyone except the One Percent. Americans are shot down in the streets, whites along with blacks, by militarized police trained to see the people who pay their salaries as enemies. Muslims are bombed into the stone age. Reformist Latin American governments are routinely overthrown. European countries are intimidated, bribed, and reduced to vassal status. Aggression is displayed toward Russia, China, and Iran. America has become a great collection of evil. The good in the country is voiceless and without power. Evil rules us.
This is why this site is important. If you do not support it, you are bringing about your own demise.
I don’t have to write. My writing brings me insults from narcistic ignorant egomanics, puts me on black lists, makes overseas travel difficult, and possibly negatively impacts my relatives. The United States has devolved into a police state where truth is “the enemy of the state,” which makes me suspect. Why should I write without your support? If you aren’t willing to support the fight, for whom am I writing?
Alexander, AL — The Southern Poverty Law Center has reached a $680,000 settlement in its lawsuit against the Alabama city of Alexander and its police chief Willie Robinson. The settlement was for depriving 190 of its residents their rights to due process (6th Amendment) and the unlawful seizure of their property (4th Amendment). Sheriff Robinson has even been asked to resign by lawyers representing their client.
Each one of the 190 individuals will receive $500 cash from the city for jailing them for being too poor to pay the fines imposed on them by the town. As reported by AL.com, “Hundreds of impoverished residents have faced unconstitutional and unjust treatment in Alexander City simply because they were too poor to pay fines and fees,” said Sam Brooke, in a press release. Brooke is the SPLC’s deputy legal director. He added, “The shuttering of this modern-day debtors’ prison, along with the monetary award, brings justice to many of the people who were unfairly targeted for being poor.”
The way the injustice flourished was as follows. A resident would receive a speeding ticket, for example. If they were unable to pay, they were arrested, taken to jail, and forced to remain there. While in jail, they would earn $20 a day for just being in jail, and $40 a day for doing laundry, cleaning, or washing police cruisers, until the total sum of the fine was paid in full. Each person was not allowed to go before a judge, nor to have a lawyer present to help in aid in their defense.
READ MORE: Cop Quietly Given Back Job After Executing Handcuffed Man on Video
“Around 30 percent of Alexander inhabitants live below the poverty line. Plaintiff Amanda Underwood is one such person, who was jailed twice for not being able to pay her fines. Underwood previously earned $8 an hour and has two young children, according to the SPLC release. After not being able to pay a fine of $205 for a traffic violation, Underwood had to borrow money to secure her release. On a separate occasion, Underwood was fined $250 for driving without a license. She spent five days in jail working off her debt.”
What may have seemed like a quick way for the town to punish offenders — and settle long-standing fines, fees, and court costs — turned out to be a complete violation of Alexander’s residents’ civil rights. Underwood reveled in the victory saying, “I am glad the city is going to pay everyone who they jailed, to try to undo some of the harm they caused…I am so proud that this lawsuit has made a difference. I hope it will help many others, especially those like me who have been unfairly punished for being poor.”
Brooke said Alexander’s settlement out of court is just the latest in a string of successful lawsuits in Alabama which have made a positive impact on civil rights. “Courts are being sued and forced to change their procedures, and judges have been censured and suspended,” Brooke said. “And now a municipality has been forced to pay those it illegally jailed. We hope and believe all courts are now getting the message: It is unacceptable to punish the poor just because of their poverty.”
READ MORE: Cops Assault, Taser Wrong Man, Laugh About Framing Him "Someone drop the dope in here"
There’s very little difference between jailing someone to work off a fine, and selling one’s property to pay for such fines. One is a debtor’s prison and the other results in a debtor’s auction. In both cases, the police benefit from free labor and free revenue generation. Civil Asset Forfeiture (CAF) has been used for years to punish citizens accused of crimes such as drunk driving, driving with too much cash on hand, or being in possession of marijuana. Hopefully, with wins such as what the SPLC has been able to achieve in Alabama, more progress can likewise be made in CAF cases across the country as well.
