Showing posts with label pro-gun. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pro-gun. Show all posts

Friday, February 22, 2013

(UPDATED) Disturbing Report: Veterans are receiving letters from VA prohibiting the ownership or purchase of firearms... Developing...

Written By Constitutional Attorney Michael Connelly, J.D.
How would you feel if you received a letter from the U.S. Government informing you that because of a physical or mental condition that the government says you have it is proposing to rule that you are incompetent to handle your own financial affairs? Suppose that letter also stated that the government is going to appoint a stranger to handle your affairs for you at your expense? That would certainly be scary enough but it gets worse.
What if that letter also stated: “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”?
That makes is sound like something right from a documentary on a tyrannical dictatorship somewhere in the world. Yet, as I write this I have a copy of such a letter right in front of me. It is being sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes. In my capacity as Executive Director of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) I have been contacted by some of these veterans and the stories I am getting are appalling.
The letter provides no specifics on the reasons for the proposed finding of incompetency; just that is based on a determination by someone in the VA. In every state in the United States no one can be declared incompetent to administer their own affairs without due process of law and that usually requires a judicial hearing with evidence being offered to prove to a judge that the person is indeed incompetent. This is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that no person shall “… be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…”.
Obviously, the Department of Veterans Affairs can’t be bothered by such impediments as the Constitution, particularly since they are clearly pushing to fulfill one of Obama’s main goals, the disarming of the American people. Janet Napolitano has already warned law enforcement that some of the most dangerous among us are America’s heroes, our veterans, and now according to this letter from the VA they can be prohibited from buying or even possessing a firearm because of a physical or mental disability.
Think about it, the men and women who have laid their lives on the line to defend us and our Constitution are now having their own Constitutional rights denied. There are no clear criteria for the VA to declare a veteran incompetent. It can be the loss of a limb in combat, a head injury, a diagnosis of PTSD, or even a soldier just telling someone at the VA that he or she is depressed over the loss of a buddy in combat. In none of these situations has the person been found to be a danger to themselves or others. If that was the case than all of the Americans who have suffered from PTSD following the loss of a loved one or from being in a car accident would also have to be disqualified from owning firearms. It would also mean that everyone who has ever been depressed for any reason should be disarmed. In fact, many of the veterans being deprived of their rights have no idea why it is happening.
The answer seems to be it is simply because they are veterans. At the USJF we intend to find the truth by filing a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Veterans Affairs to force them to disclose the criteria they are using to place veterans on the background check list that keeps them from exercising their Second Amendment rights. Then we will take whatever legal steps are necessary to protect our American warriors.
The reality is that Obama will not get all of the gun control measures he wants through Congress, and they wouldn’t be enough for him anyway. He wants a totally disarmed America so there will be no resistance to his plans to rob us of our nation. That means we have to ask who will be next. If you are receiving a Social Security check will you get one of these letters? Will the government declare that you are incompetent because of your age and therefore banned from firearm ownership. It certainly fits in with the philosophy and plans of the Obama administration. It is also certain that our military veterans don’t deserve this and neither do any other Americans.
-- Michael Connelly, J.D.
Executive Director, United States Justice Foundation
Follow Us: @redflagnews on Twitter
Get the RedFlag app today for Apple and Android devices...

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

336 County Sheriffs Will Defend the Constitution


Constitutional County Sheriff's Honor Roll

336 County Sheriffs Will Defend the Constitution

If you are a sheriff or you know of a Sheriff that would like to be added to this list please call Keith Broaders at (951) 282-3271 or email him at keithbroaders@gmail.com

Visit www.ConstitutionalCountySheriffs.com

For more information about the movement to restore our Constitutional Republic.

 

Alabama

  1. Houston County, Alabama Sheriff Andy Hughes

  2. Baldwin County Alabama Sheriff Huey "Hoss" Mack

  3. Madison County, Alabama Sheriff Blake Dorning

  4. Morgan County, Alabama Sheriff Ana Franklin

 

Alaska (there are no counties in Alaska

 

Arizona

  1. Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio

  2. Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels

  3. Mohave County Sheriff Tom Sheahan

  4. Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu

  5. Yavapai County Sheriff Scott Mascher

  6. Yuma County Sheriff Leon Wilmot

Arkansas

  1. Boone County Sheriff Mike Moore

  2. Cross County Sheriff J.R. Smith

  3. Madison County Sheriff Phil Morgan

  4. Scott County Sheriff Cody Carpenter

  5. Van Buren County Sheriff Scott Bradley

  6. Washington County Sheriff Tim Helder

California

  1. Amador County Sheriff Martin Ryan

  2. Butte County Sheriff Jerry Smith

  3. El Dorado County Sheriff John D'Agostini

  4. Del Norte County Sheriff Dean Wilson

  5. Fresno County, Sheriff Margaret Mims

  6. Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Downey

  7. Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood

  8. Lassen County Sheriff Dean Growden

  9. Mendocino County Sheriff Thomas Allman

  10. Modoc County Sheriff Mike Poindexter

  11. Nevada County Sheriff Keith Royal

  12. Placer County Sheriff Ed Bonner

  13. Plumas County Sheriff Greg Hagwood

  14. Riverside County Sheriff Stanley Sniff

  15. Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko

  16. Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey

  17. Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson

  18. Tehama County Sheriff David Hencraft

  19. Trinity County Sheriff Bruce Haney

  20. Tuolumne County Sheriff James W. Mele

 

Colorado

  1. Adams County Sheriff Doug Darr

  2. Alamosa County Sheriff Dave Strong

  3. Archuleta County Sheriff Peter Gonzalez

  4. Baca County Sheriff Dave Campbell

  5. Bent County Sheriff Dave Encinias

  6. Chaffee County Sheriff William Palmer

  7. Cheyenne County Sheriff Ken Putnam

  8. Clear Creek County Sheriff Don Kruger

  9. Conejos County Sheriff Robert Gurule

  10. Costilla County Sheriff Amos Medina

  11. Crowley County Sheriff Miles Clark

  12. Custer County Sheriff Fred Jobe

  13. Delta County Sheriff Fred McKee

  14. Dolores County Jerry Martin

  15. Douglas County Sheriff Dave Weaver

  16. Eagle County Sheriff Joe Hoy

  17. El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa

  18. Elbert County Sheriff Shayne Heap

  19. Fremont County Sheriff James Biecker

  20. Garfield County Sheriff Lou Vallario

  21. Gilpin County Sheriff Bruce Hartman

  22. Grand County Sheriff Rodney Johnson

  23. Gunnison County Sheriff Rickard Besecker

  24. Hinsdale County Sheriff Ron Bruce

  25. Huerfano County Sheriff Bruce Newman

  26. Jackson County Sheriff Scott Fisher

  27. Jefferson County Sheriff Ted Mink

  28. Kiowa Forest County Sheriff Frazee

  29. Kit Carson County Sheriff Tom Ridnour

  30. La Plata County Sheriff Duke Schirard

  31. Lake County Sheriff Rodney Fenske

  32. Larimer County Sheriff Jutin Smith

  33. Lincoln County Sheriff Tom Nestor

  34. Logan County Sheriff Brett Powell

  35. Mesa County Sheriff Stan Hilkey

  36. Mineral County Sheriff Fred Hosselkus

  37. Moffat County Sheriff Tim Jantz

  38. Montezuma County Sheriff Dennis Spruell

  39. Montrose County Sheriff Rick Dunlap

  40. Morgan County Sheriff Jim Crone

  41. Otero County Sheriff Chris Johnson

  42. Ouray County Sheriff Dominic Mattivi

  43. Park County Sheriff Fred Wegener

  44. Phillips County Sheriff Charles Urbach

  45. Ptkin County Sheriff Joe DiSalvo

  46. Prower County Sheriff Jim Faull

  47. Pueblo County Sheriff Kirk Taylor

  48. Rio Blanco County Sheriff Si Woodruff

  49. Rio Grande County Sheriff Brian Norton

  50. Routt County Sheriff Garret Wiggins

  51. Saguache County Sheriff Mike Norris

  52. San Juan County Sheriff Sue Kurtz

  53. San Miguel County Sheriff Bill Masters

  54. Sedgwick County Sheriff Randy Peck

  55. Summit County Sheriff John Minor

  56. Teller County Sheriff Mike Ensminger

  57. Washington County Larry Kuntz

  58. Weld County Sheriff John Cooke

  59. Yuma County Sheriff Chad Day


Broomfield County has no Sheriff and the Sheriffs of Arapahoe, Boulder and Denver are opposed to the position taken by the Colorado Sheriff's Association.

 

Delaware

  1. Sussex County, Delaware Sheriff Jeff Christopher

Florida

 

  1. Bay County. Florida Sheriff Frank McKeithen

  2. Clay County, Florida Sheriff Rick Beseler

  3. Lee County, Florida Sheriff Mike Scott

  4. Polk County, Florida Sheriff Grady Judd

  5. Walton County, Florida Sheriff Michael Adkinson

 

Georgia

  1. Cherokee County Sheriff Roger Garrison

  2. Cobb County Sheriff Neil Warren

  3. Fannin County Sheriff Dale Kirby

  4. Gilmer County Sheriff Stacy Nicholson

  5. Gwinnett County Butch Conway

  6. Oconee County Sheriff Scott Berry

  7. Paulding County Sheriff Gary Gulledge

  8. Towns County Sheriff Chris Clinton

  9. Twigg County Sheriff Darren Mitchum

  10. Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman

Idaho

 

  1. Benewah County Sheriff Dave Resser

  2. Bonner County Sheriff Daryl Wheeler

  3. Canyon County Sheriff Kieran Donahue

  4. Clark County Sheriff Bart May

  5. Clearwater County Sheriff Chris Goetz

  6. Gem County Sheriff Chuck Rolland

  7. Idaho County Sheriff Doug Giddings

  8. Jerome County Sheriff Doug McFall

  9. Lewis County Sheriff Brian Brokop

  10. Madison County Sheriff Roy Klingler

  11. Nez Perce County Sheriff Joe Rodriguez

  12. Twin Falls County, Sheriff Tom Carter

Illinois

  1. DuPage County Sheriff John Zaruba

  2. Edgar County, Illinois Sheriff Edward Motley:

  3. McLean County, Illinois Sheriff Mike Emery

  4. Clark County, Illinos Sheriff Jerry Parsley

Indiana

  1. Boone County Sheriff Ken P. Campbell

  2. Elkhart County Sheriff Brad Rogers

  3. Franklin County Sheriff Ken Murphy

  4. Riply County Sheriff Tom Grills

Iowa

  1. Cedar County, Iowa Sheriff Warren M. Wethington

Kansas

  1. Johnson County, Kansas Sheriff Frank Denning

Kentucky

  1. Bath County, Kentucky Sheriff John Snedegar

  2. Boone County, Kentucky Sheriff Micahel A. Helmig

  3. Jackson County, Kentucky Sheriff Denny Peyman

  4. Kenton County, Kentucky Sheriff Chuck Korzenborn

  5. Powell County, Kentucky Sheriff Scott F. Harrison

Maine

Maryland

  1. Frederick County, Maryland Sheriff Charles A. Jenkins

  2. Carroll County, Maryland Sheriff Ken Tregoning

Massachusetts

 

Michigan

  1. Barry County, Michigan Sheriff Dar Leaf

  2. Benzie County, Michigan Sheriff Ted Schende

  3. Kent County, Michigan Sheriff Larry Stelma

  4. Menominee County Sheriff Kenny Mays

Minnesota

  1. Anoka County, Minnesota James Stuart

  2. Pine County, Minnesota Sheriff Robin Cole

  3. Hennipen County, Minnesota Sheriff Rich Stanek

  4. Itasca County Sheriff Victor Williams

  5. Yellow Medicine, Minnesota Sheriff Bill Flaten

  6. Ramsey County, Minnesota Sheriff Matt Bostrom

  7. Steams County, Minnesota Sheriff John Sanner

Mississippi

  1. DeSoto County, Mississippi Sheriff Bill Rasco

  2. Forrest County, Mississippi Sheriff Billy McGee

  3. Monroe County, Mississippi Sheriff Cecil Cantrell

  4. Oktibbeha County Sheriff Steve Gladney

Missouri

  1. Barry County, Missouri Sheriff Mick Epperly

  2. Butler County Sheriff Mark Dobbs

  3. Johnson County, Missouri Sheriff Charles Heiss

  4. Gasconda County Sheriff Randy Esphorst

  5. Lawrence County, Missouri Sheriff Brad DeLay

  6. Livingston County, Missouri Sheriff Steve Cox

  7. Marion County, Missouri Jimmy Shinn

  8. Mercer County, Missouri Sheriff Stephen Stockman

  9. Oregon County, Missouri Sheriff George R. Underwood

  10. Osage County, Missouri Sheriff Michael Dixon

  11. Perry County Sheriff Gary Schaaf

  12. Ralls County, Missouri Sheriff Gerry Dinwiddie

  13. Shannon County, Missour Sheriff Steven Blunkall

  14. Texas County Sheriff James Sigman

  15. Warren County Sheriff Kevin T. Harrison

Montana

  1. Cascade County, Montana Sheriff Bob Edwards

  2. Lake County, Montana Sheriff Jay Doyle

  3. Lewis and Clark County, Montana Sheriff Leo Dutton

  4. Musselshell County, Sheriff Woodrow Weitseil

  5. Powell County, Montana Sheriff Scott F. Howard

  6. Ravalli County, Montana, Sheriff Chris Hoffman

  7. Sanders County, Montana Sheriff Tom Rummel

  8. Wibaux County, Montana Sheriff Darby Harrington

  9. Yellowstone County, Montana Sheriff Mike Linder

Nebraska

  1. Cumberland County Sheriff Ronny R. Anderson

Nevada

  1. Churchill County Sheriff Benjamin D. Trotter

  2. Elko County Sheriff Jim Pitts

  3. Humboldt County Sheriff Ed Kilgpore

  4. Nye County Sheriff Tony DeMeo

New Hampshire

  1. Grafton County, New Hampshire Sheriff Douglas R Dutile

New Mexico

  1. Bernalillo County, NM Sheriff Dan Houston

  2. Catron County, NM Sheriff Shawn Menges

  3. Chaves County, NM Sheriff Patrick R Jennings

  4. Cibola County, NM Sheriff Johnny Valdez

  5. Colfax County, NM Sheriff Jim Maldonado

  6. De Baca County, NM Sheriff Dennis A. Cleaver

  7. Dona Ana County, NM Sheriff Todd Garrison

  8. Eddy County, NM is Sheriff Scott London

  9. Grant County, NM Sheriff Raul Holguin

  10. Guadalupe County, NM Sheriff Michael R Lucero

  11. Harding County, NM Sheriff Herman Martinez

  12. Hidalgo County, NM Sheriff Saturnino Madero

  13. Lea County, NM Sheriff Sheriff, Mark Hargrove

  14. Lincoln County, NM Sheriff Robert Sheppard

  15. Los Alamos County, NM Sheriff Marco Lucero

  16. Luna County, NM Sheriff Raymond Cobos

  17. Otero County, NM Sheriff Benny House

  18. Quay County, NM Sheriff Joe Schallert

  19. Arriba County, NM Sheriff Joe Mascarenas

  20. Roosevelt County, NM Sheriff Darren Hooker

  21. San Juan County, NM Sheriff Ken Christesen

  22. San Miguel County, NM Sheriff Benjie Vigil

  23. Santa Fe County, NM Sheriff Robert Garcia

  24. Sierra County, NM Sheriff Joe Baca

  25. Socorro County, NM Sheriff Phillip Montoya

  26. Taos County, NM Sheriff Miguel Romero Jr

  27. Torrance County, NM Sheriff Heath White

  28. Union County, NM Sheriff William Spriggs

  29. Valencia County, NM Sheriff Louis Burkhard

New York

  1. Erie County Sheriff Timothy B. Howard

  2. Otsego County Sheriff Richard Devlin Jr.

  3. Putnam County Sheriff Donald Smith

  4. Schoharie County Sheriff Tony Desmond

  5. Steuben County Sheriff David Cole

  6. Suffolk County Sheriff Vincent DeMarco

North Carolina

  1. Catawba County Sheriff Coy Reid

  2. Cleveland County Sheriff Alan Norman

  3. Edgefield County Sheriff Adell Dobey

  4. Franklin County Sheriff Jerry Jones

  5. Harnett County Sheriff Larry Rollins

  6. Henderson County Sheriff Charlie McDonald

  7. New Hanover County Sheriff Castle Hayne

  8. Sampson County Sheriff Jimmy Thornton

  9. Stokes County Sheriff Mike Marshall

  10. Union County Sheriff Eddie Cathey

  11. Wake County Sheriff Donnie Harrison

  12. Wayne County Sheriff Carey Winders

North Dakota

 

Ohio

  1. Allen County Sheriff Sam Crish

  2. Auglaize County Sheriff Al Solomon

  3. Clermont County Sheriff A.J. Rodenberg

  4. Hancock and Gray County Sheriff Mike Heldman

  5. Hamilton County Sheriff Harrel Reid

  6. Mercer County Sheriff Jeff Grey

  7. Richland County Sheriff J. Steve Sheldon

Oklahoma

  1. Jackson County Sheriff Roger LeVick

  2. Major County Sheriff Steven Randolph

  3. McCurtain County Sheriff Johnny Tadlock

  4. Wagoner County Sheriff Bob Colbert

  5. Westmoreland County Sheriff Jonathan Held

Oregon

  1. Baker County Sheriff Mitchell Southwick

  2. Coos County Sheriff Craig Zanni

  3. Crook County Sheriff Jim Hensley

  4. Curry County Sheriff John Bishop

  5. Deschutes County Sheriff Larry Blanton

  6. Douglas County Sheriff John Hanlin

  7. Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer

  8. Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters

  9. Josephine County Sheriff Gil Gilbertson

  10. Klamath County Sheriff Frank Skrah

  11. Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller

  12. Malheur County Sheriff Brian Wolfe

  13. Marion County Sheriff Jason Myers

  14. Multnomah County Sheriff Daniel Staton

  15. Polk County Sheriff Bob Wolfe

  16. Union County Sheriff Boyd Rasmussen

  17. Wallowa County Sheriff Steve Rogers

  18. Washington County Sheriff Pat Garrett

  19. Yamhill County Sheriff Jack Crabtree

Pennsylvania

  1. Adams County Sheriff Jim Muller

  2. Berks County Sheriff Eric J. Weaknecht

  3. Bradford County Sheriff Clinton J. Walters

  4. Chester County Sheriff Carolyn "Bunny" Welsh

  5. Cumberland County Sheriff Ronnie Anderson

  6. Elk County, Sheriff Jeffrey C. Kreig

Rhode Island

South Carolina

  1. Abbeyville County Sheriff Ronnie Ashley

  2. Berkeley County Sheriff Wayne DeWitt

  3. Charleston County Sheriff Al Cannon

  4. Kershaw County Sheriff Jim Matthews

  5. Lexington County Sheriff James Metts

  6. Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright

  7. York County Sheriff Bruce Bryant

 

South Dakota

 

Tennessee

  1. Bradley County Sheriff Jim Ruth

  2. Hamilton County Sheriff Jim Hammond

  3. White County Sheriff Oddie Shoupe

Texas

  1. Austin County Sheriff Jack Brandes

  2. Anderson County Sheriff Greg Taylor

  3. Burnet County Sheriff R. Gene Smith

  4. Collin County Sheriff Terry Box

  5. Ellis County Sheriff Johnny Brown

  6. Fort Bend County Sheriff Troy Nehls

  7. Harden County Sheriff Ed Cain

  8. Hill County Sheriff Michael Cox,

  9. Hutchinson County Sheriff Don L Johnson

  10. Johnson County Sheriff Bob Alford

  11. Mason County Sheriff Buster Nixon

  12. Mills County Sheriff Clint Hammonds

  13. McCulloch County Sheriff Earl Howell

  14. McLennan County Sheriff Parnell McNamara

  15. Montgomery County Sheriff Tommy Gage

  16. Oldham County Sheriff David Medlin

  17. Randall County Sheriff Joel W. Richardson

  18. Smith County Sheriff Larry Smith

  19. Waller County Sheriff R. Glen Smith

Utah

  1. Beaver County Sheriff Cameron Noel

  2. Box Elder County Sheriff Joseph Yeates

  3. Cache County Sheriff G. Lynn Nelson

  4. Carbon County Sheriff James Cordova

  5. Daggett County Sheriff Allan Campbell

  6. Davis County Sheriff Todd Richardson

  7. Duchesne County Sheriff Merv Gustin

  8. Emery County Sheriff Greg Funk

  9. Garfiled County Sheriff Than Cooper

  10. Grand County Sheriff James B. Nyland Sr.

  11. Iron County Sheriff Mark Gower

  12. Juab County Sheriff Alden Orme

  13. Kane County Sheriff Lamont Smith

  14. Millard County Sheriff Robert Dekker

  15. Morgan County Sheriff Gene Ercanbrack

  16. Piute County Sheriff Mary Gleave

  17. Rich County Sheriff Dale Stacey

  18. San Juan County Sheriff Rick Eldridge

  19. Sanpete County Sheriff Kay P. Larsen

  20. Sevier County,Sheriff Phil Barney

  21. Summit County Sheriff David A. Edmunds

  22. Tooele County Sheriff Frank J. Park

  23. Uintah County Sheriff Jeff Merrell

  24. Utah County Sheriff James B. Tracy

  25. Wasatch County Sheriff Kenneth Vanwagoner

  26. Washington County Sheriff Kirk Smith

  27. Wayne County Sheriff Kurt R. Taylor

  28. Weber County Sheriff Terry Thompson

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

  1. Asotin County Sheriff Ken Bancroft

  2. Grant County Sheriff Tom Jones

  3. Lewis County Sheriff Steve Mansfield

  4. Whitman County Sheriff Brett Myers

  5. Yakima County Sheriff Ken Irwin

 

West Virginia

  1. Boone County Sheriff Randal White

  2. Roane County Sheriff Mike Harper

  3. Wood County Sheriff Ken Merritt

Wisconsin

 

  1. Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr

 


Visit Constitutional Sheriff's Association at: http://constitutionclub.ning.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network

Monday, February 11, 2013

Friday, February 8, 2013

Working to Counter Online Radicalization to Violence in the United States

Working to Counter Online Radicalization to Violence in the United States

The American public increasingly relies on the Internet for socializing, business transactions, gathering information, entertainment, and creating and sharing content. The rapid growth of the Internet has brought opportunities but also risks, and the Federal Government is committed to empowering members of the public to protect themselves against the full range of online threats, including online radicalization to violence.
Violent extremist groups ─ like al-Qa’ida and its affiliates and adherents, violent supremacist groups, and violent “sovereign citizens” ─ are leveraging online tools and resources to propagate messages of violence and division. These groups use the Internet to disseminate propaganda, identify and groom potential recruits, and supplement their real-world recruitment efforts.  Some members and supporters of these groups visit mainstream fora to see whether individuals might be recruited or encouraged to commit acts of violence, look for opportunities to draw targets into private exchanges, and exploit popular media like music videos and online video games.  Although the Internet offers countless opportunities for Americans to connect, it has also provided violent extremists with access to new audiences and instruments for radicalization.
As a starting point to prevent online radicalization to violence in the homeland, the Federal Government initially will focus on raising awareness about the threat and providing communities with practical information and tools for staying safe online. In this process, we will work closely with the technology industry to consider policies, technologies, and tools that can help counter violent extremism online. Companies already have developed voluntary measures to promote Internet safety ─ such as fraud warnings, identity protection, and Internet safety tips ─ and we will collaborate with industry to explore how we might counter online violent extremism without interfering with lawful Internet use or the privacy and civil liberties of individual users.
This approach is consistent with Internet safety principles that have helped keep communities safe from a range of online threats, such as cyber bullies, scammers, gangs, and sexual predators. While each of these threats is unique, experience has shown that a well-informed public, armed with tools and resources to stay safe online, is critical to protecting communities. Pursuing such an approach is also consistent with the community-based framework we outlined in Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States and the Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States.
A New Interagency Working Group
To more effectively organize our efforts, the Administration is establishing a new Interagency Working Group to Counter Online Radicalization to Violence, chaired by the National Security Staff at the White House and involving specialists in countering violent extremism, Internet safety experts, and civil liberties and privacy practitioners from across the United States Government. This Working Group will be responsible for developing plans to implement an Internet safety approach to address online violent extremism, coordinating the Federal Government’s activities and assessing our progress against these plans, and identifying additional activities to pursue for countering online radicalization to violence.
Raising Awareness through Existing Initiatives
In the coming months, the Working Group will coordinate with Federal departments and agencies to raise awareness and disseminate tools for staying safe from online violent extremism primarily through three means.
First, information about online violent extremism will be incorporated into existing Federal Government Internet safety initiatives.  Internet safety initiatives at the Department of Education, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Homeland Security, and other agencies provide platforms that already reach millions of Americans, and relevant departments and agencies will work to add materials related to online radicalization.
The primary government platform for raising awareness about Internet safety is OnGuard Online, managed by the Federal Trade Commission and involving 16 departments and agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Education.  OnGuard Online─ in addition to other Federal Government Internet safety platforms like Stop.Think.Connect and Safe Online Surfing─ will begin including information about online violent extremism.  This information also will be posted on the Countering Violent Extremism homepage on the Department of Homeland Security’s website and updated to reflect new best practices and research.
Second, the Federal Government will work with local organizations throughout the country to disseminate information about the threat.  One reason for the success of Federal Government Internet safety awareness efforts is that they work closely with local organizations — such as school districts, Parent Teacher Associations, local government, and law enforcement — to communicate to communities.  Law enforcement is a particularly important partner in raising awareness about radicalization to violence and is already developing materials with support from the Department of Justice. Law enforcement departments and agencies have established Internet safety programs and relationships with community members and local organizations that can reach multiple audiences with critical information about the threat of online violent extremism and recruitment. Departments and agencies will provide the latest assessments of this threat to our local partners and encourage them to incorporate this information into their programs and initiatives.
Third, departments and agencies will use our preexisting engagement with communities to provide information about Internet safety and details about how violent extremists are using the Internet to target and exploit communities.  U.S. Attorneys throughout the country, who historically have engaged with communities on a range of public safety issues, are coordinating these Federal engagement efforts at the local level, with support from other departments and agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Education.  U.S. Attorneys and others involved in community engagement will seek to incorporate information about Internet radicalization to violence into their efforts, as appropriate.  At the same time, the Federal Government will engage with State, local, and tribal government and law enforcement officials to learn from their experiences in addressing online threats, including violent extremism.
Going Forward
As the Federal Government implements this effort in the coming months, we will continue to investigate and prosecute those who use the Internet to recruit others to plan or carry out acts of violence, while ensuring that we also continue to uphold individual privacy and civil liberties.  Preventing online radicalization to violence requires both proactive solutions to reduce the likelihood that violent extremists affect their target audiences as well as ensuring that laws are rigorously enforced.

Friday, February 1, 2013

Armed Guard Stops School Shooter After He Opened Fire at Atlanta Middle School



Armed Guard Stops School Shooter After He Opened Fire at Atlanta Middle School
Authorities stage at Price Middle school in Atlanta Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, after a child was shot. Credit: AP
ATLANTA (AP) — A student opened fire at his middle school Thursday afternoon, wounding a 14-year-old in the neck before an armed officer working at the school was able to get the gun away, police said.
Multiple shots were fired in the courtyard of Price Middle School just south of downtown about 1:50 p.m. and the one boy was hit, Atlanta Police Chief George Turner said. In the aftermath, a teacher received minor cuts, he said.
The wounded boy was taken “alert, conscious and breathing” to Grady Memorial Hospital, said police spokesman Carlos Campos. Grady Heath System Spokeswoman Denise Simpson said the teen had been discharged from the hospital Thursday night. Campos said charges against the shooter were pending.
Police swarmed the school of about 400 students after reports of the shooting while a crowd of anxious parents gathered in the streets, awaiting word on their children. Students were kept at the locked-down school for more than two hours before being dismissed.
Investigators believe the shooting was not random and that something occurred between the two students that may have led to it.
Schools Superintendent Erroll Davis said the school does have metal detectors.
“The obvious question is how did this get past a metal detector?” Davis asked about the gun. “That’s something we do not know yet.”
The armed resource officer who took the gun away was off-duty and at the school, but police didn’t release details on him or whether he is regularly at Price. Since 20 children and six adults were shot to death at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in December, calls for armed officers in every school have resonated across the country.



Hours after the Atlanta shooting, several school buses loaded with children pulled away from the school and stopped in front of a church about a half-block away. Parents tried boarding the buses. Police who initially tried to stop the parents, relented and screamed, “Let them off!” about the students.
Armed Guard Stops School Shooter After He Opened Fire at Atlanta Middle School
Busses arrive at a church carrying children from Price Middle school in Atlanta on Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, after a child was shot at the school. Credit: AP
Armed Guard Stops School Shooter After He Opened Fire at Atlanta Middle School
Authorities stage at Price Middle school in Atlanta Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, after a child was shot. Credit: AP
Armed Guard Stops School Shooter After He Opened Fire at Atlanta Middle School
Authorities stage at Price Middle school in Atlanta Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, after a child was shot. A 14-year-old boy was wounded outside the school Thursday afternoon and a fellow student was in custody as a suspect, authorities said. No other students were hurt. Credit: AP
James Bolton was at work when his sister called saying a teen had been shot at his son’s school and was in the crowd as parents began swarming the fleet of buses.
“Move, I see my son, I see mine!” he said, running up to embrace James Bolton Jr. “As long as I got this one back I’m OK,” he said, holding his son’s head against his chest as parents nearby frantically searched for their children.
Bolton Jr. said he was in class when the intercom sounded and a school official announced the building was under immediate lockdown.
“They told us we had to be quiet,” Bolton told The Associated Press. “They said something went on in the courtyard.” Bolton said he was unaware that anyone had been shot until a reporter asked him about it.
Shakita Walker, whose daughter is an eighth-grader at the school, said she received a text from her that said, “Ma somebody’s shooting and somebody got shot.” Walker, who works at another school, said she jumped in her car and was thinking “just hurry up and get there.”
Walker said her daughter called to tell her that they were being kept in the gymnasium, but she said she was anxious to see her to make sure she was OK.
The fear and anxiety was palpable in the crowd, as one person yelled, “Does anyone know what happened?”
Superintendent Davis sympathized with concerned parents who complained that it took too long for students to be released from the building. He said emergency procedures were followed according to protocol and school district officials would meet Friday to review their response. Calls to the school district were not immediately returned.
Mayor Kasim Reed condemned gun violence in a statement shortly after the shooting and said counselors were at the school to meet with students, faculty and family members.
“Gun violence in and around our schools is simply unconscionable and must end,” Reed said. “Too many young people are being harmed, and too many families are suffering from unimaginable and unnecessary grief.”
Outside the school, Laquanda Pittman said she still hasn’t heard from her sixth-grade son. She said she heard the news of the shooting on TV and immediately came to the school.
“All types of stuff went through my head. I’m wondering whether it was my child who got shot, is my child OK, did he see what happened?” Pittman said.
She said she just wants to see her son.
“As a parent, you just think you can send your child to school and you hope they come home OK,” she said.


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/31/armed-guard-stops-school-shooter-after-he-opened-fire-at-atlanta-middle-school/

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Tyranny is coming in America No Need For Guns In America

Author
- Erik Rush (Bio and Archives)  Friday, January 25, 2013
(8) Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

For those of you who know me, you can pick your jaw up off the floor (after reading the title) and move on. There is a pseudo-discussion taking place all over America about gun ownership which consists of the actual “need” for firearms in citizens’ hands and limits that should be placed on American gun owners. As unlikely as it might seem, this is pure distraction.
In an earlier life – the one the press refuses to report – Obama summarily declared that he believed Americans should not own guns. That declaration seems to have been forgotten by some who are attributing to Mr. Obama scruples, morals, and decency that he does not possess – not to mention his demonstrated disregard for the Constitution of the United States in general. Reasonableness is what the American public generally displays and expects in return.
I’m sorry to burst the bubble here, but that is not what is happening on the Obama side of that ledger. Lies, obfuscation, the sweet smile, the demonization or marginalization of those who uphold the Second Amendment, assurances of faithfulness to the Constitution and a love for the children are merely diversionary precursors to his totalitarian end game. All are bogus, all staging and melodrama for the cameras.
Tyranny is coming in America, despite the fact that more than half of her citizens are too deluded, arrogant, or stupid to see it. If Obama’s policy processes continue unchecked, America will experience cataclysmic civil unrest; again, unfathomable to most Americans, this is precisely what Obama intends.
The words of this President are so rife with fraud and deceit that good people simply cannot believe anyone appearing so benevolent could possibly be so bad. At this juncture I would ask the question, Do you believe that the President really wants to have an open and honest discussion with the American people about the “problem” of violence and the misuse of guns in crime?
Has he ever followed through on conducting an open and honest discussion with the American people about anything? So we have our answer.
A second question might be this: Do you believe that the President will alter his long-standing belief that no American should own a gun after this discussion is over? The third and final question, assuming the answers to the first two questions are “no,” is Might the training of American military and police in guerilla warfare techniques coupled with manuals in the “How to” of gun confiscation be an indicator of where this “discussion” is really going?
If the answer to that one is “yes,” then have Americans just been convinced into thinking that the President is “open” to changing his thinking, and is “transparent” enough not to have a hidden agenda?
Obama, with the eager cooperation of the American press and the anti-gun lobby, are creating the perception of Second Amendment proponents as manifestly evil. Not misguided, not wrong – but evil. As such, he will set the stage for all “reasonable” Americans to support the wholesale dismantling of the Second Amendment, and if this means wholesale firearms confiscation and the bloodshed to which this will no doubt give rise, so much the better. This will give him legitimacy in his move of declaring martial law – in fact, he will have “no choice,” so it will appear.
This will be, as we’ve seen in so many other nations, the move across the threshold into totalitarian rule. We must never forget that this is a person who grew up studying and admiring Mao, Lenin, Stalin, and Castro – men who murdered hundreds of millions in their ascent to total dominion over their respective nations. Just this week, it was reported that a former senior military staffer revealed Obama’s new litmus test for top military brass: Can they give the order to fire on American citizens?
P.T. Barnum (of Barnum and Bailey Circus fame) was a practiced con artist. He taught his people well in the art of distraction; while folks were watching the right hand, the left hand was pulling the trick off right under the nose of the audience. Amazed, they would declare in wonder, “How did they do that?” The answer, of course, was that it happened right under their noses, while they were watching, and they had just been misdirected. Those who have researched the President’s multitudinous executive orders alone know that the Obama administration has mastered this technique.
There is no real discussion in America about gun ownership in America at any level that matters; Obama will confiscate them all – or at least he will attempt to do so. The question is: Will America see how it is being tricked before it is too late?
Erik Rush is a New York-born columnist, author and speaker who writes sociopolitical commentary for numerous online and print publications. In February of 2007, Erik was the first to break the story of President (then Senator) Barack Obama’s ties to militant Chicago preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright on a national level, which ignited a media firestorm that smolders to this day. His latest book, “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal ~ America’s Racial Obsession,” examines the racist policies by which the political left keeps black Americans in thralldom, white Americans guilt-ridden and yielding, and maintains the fallacy that America remains an institutionally racist nation. Links to his work are available at Erikrush.com.

Gun Control Advocates Need to Listen to Gun Owners, Obama Says

WASHINGTON – President Obama said that he and his guests go skeet shooting at Camp David “all the time” and that gun control advocates need “to do a little more listening” to understand why so many Americans are wary of government limits on firearms.
In an interview released Sunday morning, Mr. Obama acknowledged that getting his package of gun proposals through Congress could be tough, and he expressed empathy for the strong sentiments of gun owners. Like Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who has mentioned that he owns two shotguns, Mr. Obama tried to associate himself with those who enjoy firing guns.
“Up at Camp David, we do skeet shooting all the time,” he told The New Republic in the interview, conducted Jan. 16, just after he unveiled his gun proposals.
Asked about his family, he said, “Not the girls, but oftentimes guests of mine go up there. And I have a profound respect for the traditions of hunting that trace back in this country for generations. And I think those who dismiss that out of hand make a big mistake.”
He added that the experience with guns in rural America differed dramatically from that in urban America. “If you grew up and your dad gave you a hunting rifle when you were 10, and you went out and spent the day with him and your uncles, and that became part of your family’s traditions, you can see why you’d be pretty protective of that,” he said.
“So it’s trying to bridge those gaps that I think is going to be part of the biggest task over the next several months,” he added. “And that means that advocates of gun control have to do a little more listening than they do sometimes.”
Mr. Obama has proposed reinstating and strengthening an expired ban on new assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, expanding criminal background checks for nearly all gun sales except those within families, and cracking down on straw purchasers who buy firearms for others who would not be able to pass a background check. He also used his executive authority to try to improve the background check database and to revive government research into gun violence.
In the interview, Mr. Obama also expressed concern for the state of football in America, particularly at the college level, where there is no union to represent the interests of players.
“I’m a big football fan,” he said, “but I have to tell you, if I had a son, I’d have to think long and hard before I let him play football. And I think those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to reduce some of the violence.”
Asked about the continuing rebellion in Syria that has led to tens of thousands of deaths, Mr. Obama made clear that he has declined to intervene because he is haunted by a series of questions that he cannot answer satisfactorily.
“In a situation like Syria,” he said, “I have to ask, can we make a difference in that situation? Would a military intervention have an impact? How would it affect our ability to support troops who are still in Afghanistan? What would be the aftermath of our involvement on the ground? Could it trigger even worse violence or the use of chemical weapons? What offers the best prospect of a stable post-Assad regime? And how do I weigh tens of thousands who’ve been killed in Syria versus the tens of thousands who are currently being killed in the Congo?”
The interview was conducted by Chris Hughes, a founder of Facebook who bought The New Republic last year, and Franklin Foer, the magazine’s editor. Mr. Hughes was coordinator of online organizing for Mr. Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and has contributed money to him since then. The president gave the interview as the magazine is reintroducing itself in the coming days.

Beware gun registration – It's coming Exclusive: Patrice Lewis warns of impending national registry system for all firearms

by Patrice Lewis Email | Archive
rss feed Subscribe to feed
Patrice Lewis is a freelance writer whose latest book is "The Simplicity Primer: 365 Ideas for Making Life more Livable." She is co-founder (with her husband) of a home woodcraft business. The Lewises live on 20 acres in north Idaho with their two homeschooled children, assorted livestock, a




“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” – Unknown
In the spirit of never letting a crisis go to waste, President Obama recently issued 23 new executive orders on the subject of gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings. “Liberals have an uncanny knack for designing solutions that do not address the problem at hand,” noted David Limbaugh. And as William S. Burrough famously said, “After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it.”
Controlling firearms, you see, is deemed necessary by progressives to achieve some sort of nebulous theoretical bucolic pacifistic utopia that has literally never occurred on the face of the earth. Their actions prove they’re attempting to take the closest approximation of that utopia that has ever existed (America) and replacing it with their simplistic notions of what America should be (by violating every principle in the Bill of Rights, which they’ve never like anyway).
Obama’s executive orders lay the groundwork for the next inevitable step toward that mythical utopian fantasy: a national registry system for all firearms (H.R. 34, H.R. 117). Gun registration, they argue, is necessary because we have to know what kind of unstable people might possess firearms and thus become the next Adam Lanza.
So let’s engage in a mental exercise and pretend the government has already passed an edict requiring all guns to be registered, no exceptions. Naturally this is done in the name of public safety – “for the children,” if you will.
OK, so now all guns are registered. Now what? What has that achieved? How would registration change anything? How would it make gun-free zones like schools any safer?
Answer: It won’t. Think about it. Gun registration contributes nothing toward a safer society. Nothing. There is no value in registration unless you intend to do something with it.
In his sobering 2003 essay, Robert A. Waters briefly relates the history of gun control in England and concludes with these eerie words: “When the Dunblane Inquiry ended [in 1997], citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn’t were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn’t comply. Police later bragged that they’d taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens. How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed. Kinda like cars.” [Emphasis added.]
This, folks, is the inevitable path gun confiscation follows. Register guns, and confiscation is the logical next step. Ah – but confiscation will only happen among the law-abiding, because criminals will never register their firearms in the first place. So where does that leave moms trying to protect their children from intruders? Dead. Because make no mistake: home invasions and other violent crimes invariably skyrocket when firearms are removed from the hands of citizens.
Our federal government is setting up the framework for our total disarmament. Oh not right away, of course. There’s still too much opposition by people who know their history and their rights. But over the next 10 or 20 years, federally funded public schools will continue to brainwash children about the evils of gun ownership. These children will grow up ignorant of their heritage and will be taught to despise their parents and grandparents, who know precisely why the Second Amendment is so important. Within a generation or two, our nation will be as emasculated as England is now – a place where violent crime has gone through the roof, people are locked away for defending themselves from thugs and where even knives are being banned.
And then the door will be opened for the rest of our rights to be dismantled. It’s well-known and well-documented that gun control doesn’t control crime. Why, then, is the government eager to control guns if it knows crime will escalate as a result? Easy. The government doesn’t give a rip for crime control. It wants citizen control. Remember, once we lose the Second Amendment, the rest of the Bill of Rights is meaningless. We the People will have no means to protect it.
When the progressives cheer additional gun-control measures, such as limiting magazine size, they argue that no one needs magazines holding more than 10 rounds for home defense or for hunting. But that argument (right or wrong) totally and entirely misses the point of the Second Amendment. Do you honestly think deer hunting or home invasions were on the minds of the Founding Fathers when they composed the Second Amendment? Or perhaps – just perhaps – fresh from the hideous tyranny of George III, they wanted to make sure their infant nation would never face a similarly abusive government? These men knew that the people of America had a natural right to arm themselves with whatever powerful firearms were necessary to ensure a home-grown tyrant never arose on our soil.
Believe me, when the Department of Homeland Security buys up 1.5 billion rounds of hollow-point ammunition, citizens need something a little better than a steak knife for defense. If our government ever decides to move en masse against innocent citizens, it must know there will be a rifle behind every blade of grass.
Did you know that worldwide, the leading cause of unnatural human death is government? Democide is defined as “the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder. Democide is not necessarily the elimination of entire cultural groups but rather groups within the country that the government feels need to be eradicated for political reasons and due to claimed future threats” (emphasis added).
The only purpose of gun registration is to let the government know who has guns – so they can be taken away. Remember that. Gun confiscation is historically followed by democide against the disarmed; this is an undeniable historical fact.
I applaud the recent massive attendance of every gun show in the nation, which is putting millions of firearms into the hands of decent law-abiding people. It demonstrates that American citizens are intelligent enough to know that the government is taking advantage of a crisis to increase its tyrannical and unconstitutional powers.
Gun registration: It’s coming. Be warned. Be ready.

Sheriff David Clarke's radio ad says 911 not best option, urges residents to take firearms classes

By Bruce Vielmetti, Steve Schultze and Don Walker of the Journal Sentinel     Jan. 25, 2013




Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. set off alarm bells Friday with a radio spot some view as a call for citizens to arm themselves.
In the radio ad, Clarke tells residents personal safety isn't a spectator sport anymore, and that "I need you in the game."
"With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option," Clarke intones.
"You could beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back."
Clarke urges listeners to take a firearm safety course and handle a firearm "so you can defend yourself until we get there."
"You have a duty to protect yourself and your family. We're partners now. Can I count on you?"
The spot aired at least once - during the last hour of the Mark Belling show on WISN-AM (1130) on Thursday. Clarke spokeswoman Fran McLaughlin posted it to the department website on Friday. She said she did not know where else or how often the spot would be broadcast, or how much the department spent to air it.
Clarke has served as lightning rod before, most recently when he called for schools to arm teachers after the Newtown, Conn., massacre of 20 children and six adults at an elementary school. News of the sheriff's gun ad quickly generated feedback.
Jodie Tabak, Mayor Tom Barrett's spokeswoman, released this statement:
"Apparently, Sheriff David Clarke is auditioning for the next Dirty Harry movie."
"Dirty Harry" was one in a series of films in the 1970s and '80s starring actor Clint Eastwood as Detective Harry Callahan of the San Francisco Police Department.
The Greenfield Police Department issued advice on its Facebook page, saying none of its officers was laid off or furloughed, that violent crime is down and the department's response time to violent crime is less than two minutes.
"The decision to arm yourself with a firearm is a very personal and private decision that should not be driven by fear that our officers will not respond to your calls for help," the department said.
Jeri Bonavia, executive director of Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort, said she hears "over and over" from most law enforcement officials that the community should work to "take more guns off the streets, not add more."
"What (Clarke's) talking about is this amped up version of vigilantism," Bonavia said. "I don't know what his motivations are for doing this. But I do know what he's calling for is dangerous and irresponsible and he should be out there saying this is a mistake."
Asked about Clarke's assessment of 911, James Fendry, director of the Wisconsin Pro Gun Movement, said, "It's never been a great option (calling 911). Unless you can take care of yourself, you're kind of SOL."
Fendry, a former police officer, said that he tells citizens, "You're not armed to be law enforcement. You're armed to protect your own life and the lives of your family until law enforcement arrives. Do not go on search and destroy missions in your home."
County Executive Chris Abele said Clarke is sending the wrong message.
"I think it's irresponsible and it doesn't help public safety to tell the public there's some kind of imminent danger that they need to go buy guns," Abele said. "Essentially, you've got a (public service announcement) that's recommending people need to go buy guns because they can't rely on the response they'll get from 911. I'm here to tell you, we have phenomenal police departments."
Roy Felber, president of the Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs' Association, said the ad sounded to him like a call to vigilantism.
"That doesn't sound smart," Felber said. "That's why society has police officers."
Instead of promoting vigilantism, Felber said, money should be found to hire more police officers and deputies.
County Supervisor Mark Borkowski, chairman of the County Board panel on public safety, said Clarke was "preaching to the choir" on gun ownership. Most people who want guns already have them, Borkowski said.
McLaughlin, Clarke's spokeswoman, said the announcement does not encourage gun ownership.
"His message says to consider taking a certified course. His message says to fight back to protect yourself. People need to decide for themselves if they want to own a firearm," she wrote in an email.
She said the Department of Homeland Security advises that in an active shooter environment, victims should run, hide, or, if those options don't exist, they should fight - aggressively.
Clarke did not respond to an interview request.
Asked to comment on Clarke's remarks, a spokeswoman for state Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said that Van Hollen "believes strongly in both the 1st and 2nd amendments" to the Constitution on free speech and gun rights.
Mark Johnson of the Journal Sentinel staff contributed to this report.



Saturday, January 26, 2013

Does God give us the “right” to keep and bear arms?


Posted by Jake Baker
January 22, 2013

Today, someone on Twitter asked the question, "Where does God give you the right to bear arms 
First, let me begin by defining government.  According to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the American government is tri-partied.  It consists of We The People, the States, and the Federal Government (not national which implies power over the people instead of a federal government, which is assigned certain tasks to complete on our behalf).
This is an important concept as concerns both U.S. and biblical law.  Government is not just the federal government or the state government, it is us all of us.
Therefore, all duties of government belong to us all.  However, we tender to the federal and state governments certain duties to be carried out on behalf of the whole government, which includes us.  So, when someone says that only government should have guns, remember we are one-third of the government structure in this country.
Further, we are the first nation in the history of this earth which had no subjects.  Every other nation considered their heads of state as rulers and the people as its subjects.  Even Great Britain had—and still has—as a basis of government, the concept of their people as subjects.  As Americans we have never subjects.  We are free men who are citizens and government is subject to us and to our designs, not the other way around.
Our history includes numerous wars with Great Britain, beginning with the Revolutionary War. That war was fought for a number of reasons, including religious persecution.  However, the catalyst for the commencement of hostilities was the British hubris believing they could simply march in and take our guns.  Men bled and died; fortunes were committed and lost; families destroyed, and lives forever changed, but in the end, America prevailed and history was forever changed.
This land remained free for a number of spiritual reasons, but also because we believed that every man should be armed. We the People were the government and to disarm us was to disarm the United States.
Now, with the same imperial hubris, the strutting peacocks calling themselves “representatives” fire about legislation that pretends as if we have no history.  They assume to themselves the position of royalty—not loyalty—in assuming they can pass gun control or confiscation legislation and steal the rights of We the People granted under the Second Amendment.
How would the nation feel if we decided tomorrow to end their rights under the First Amendment?  What if government declared tomorrow that everybody has to be a Mormon and no one is allowed to criticize the President, the Congress or the Courts?  Would they then say it is not an infringement, just a defining, or would there be an outcry that shattered every glass in the great halls of Washington D.C.?  I suspect the latter.
Obviously, there have been stains on our history, such as those left by the blood guilt of slavery, but even that, after a long hellish century, was cured by the second Great Awakening as men of faith and compassion refused any longer to tolerate the ungodly, cruelty, and horrors of slavery.  In the end the might of righteousness prevailed and the scourge of slavery was ended.
But it was the preaching of men such as George Whitefield (sometimes referred to as Whitfield), Charles Spurgeon, Charles Grandison Finney, and Jonathan Edwards that planted the seeds of faith and spiritual courage in the hearts of what would become the Christian Abolitionist movement.  And this rare blend of compassion, courage and righteous indignation fueled what would become a demand for justice for all people, with an understanding that if one man was enslaved, then all were enslaved because We The People is all of us, united as one of the three branches of government.
Remember, in those days the army was comprised of the militias of the several states. It was We The People who often brought their own arms to the conflict that engaged in the bloody four year conflict that claimed the lives of 650,000 Americans.  Remarkably, that was the same number of slaves that were present in the United States at the height of slavery. That amounts to one death for each man stolen from his land and brought here to the states as slaves.
So, were they right to take up arms to end slavery in America?  More importantly, in the larger sense, are we today—their progeny—right in our demand to keep and bear arms?  Do we truly have God-given rights protected by the U.S. Constitution; and more importantly, are these truly God-given rights in the light of scriptures?
The first answer is easy. Yes, we are both allowed and, in fact, I would argue we are expected to keep and bear arms.
The Militia Act of 1792
"Passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every "free able-bodied white male citizen" between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company. Militia members were to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack. Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall.
The militias were divided into "divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions, and companies" as the state legislatures would direct. The provisions of the first Act governing the calling up of the militia by the President in case of invasion or obstruction to law enforcement were continued in the second Act. Court martial proceedings were authorized by the statute against militia members who disobeyed orders."(Source:  Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792)
Further, the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The definition in Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines infringed as “broken, violated: transgresses.  Clearly the Founding Fathers believed that everyone should be armed.
“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the people’s liberty’s teeth.” - George Washington
I will proceed no further with the hundreds of quotes that could be applied, but suffice it to say, both history and the law support our unabridged right to keep and bear arms – of any sort – without limitation.  We are the government. We are not subjects of the government that may be stripped of our rights.
We The People are one-third of the government.  You cannot strip this third of government of guns while allowing the other two-thirds to keep theirs.  That would be as unlawful as Congress attempting to control the executive or judicial branches of the federal government.
So this discussion once again asks:  Does God give us the right to keep and bear arms?
What about the sixth commandment which is oft quoted, “Thou shalt not kill.”  Does that on its face not annul the right to keep and bear arms?  Let’s look and see what the commandment really says.
The Hebrew word used for “kill” is ratsach.  The word literally means to murder or shed innocent blood.  Therefore, the command is not prohibition against killing, but against murder or the shedding of innocent blood.
In point of fact, scripture demands the death of murderers because murder requires the scales of justice to be balanced by the blood of the murderer.  That is why we can be both prolife and pro-death penalty.  Both are just.
Therefore, the sixth commandment is not a prohibition against keeping and bearing arms; nor is it a prohibition against shooting a home invader in the dark of night —someone who presents deadly force or even for the defense of others.
Let’s look at Psalm 82:3 and 4 where we are commanded to: “Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.”
The Psalmist says that to do otherwise is judging unjustly.  If the wicked are strong and we are to deliver them—to rid them from the wicked hand—how are we to do it?
Here is what the Lord commanded David in 1 Samuel 30 when his family was kidnapped and his goods stolen:
8 "And David enquired at the Lord, saying, Shall I pursue after this troop? shall I overtake them? And he answered him, Pursue: for thou shalt surely overtake them, and without fail recover all.
9 So David went, he and the six hundred men that were with him, and came to the brook Besor, where those that were left behind stayed.
10 But David pursued, he and four hundred men: for two hundred abode behind, which were so faint that they could not go over the brook Besor.                    
11 And they found an Egyptian in the field, and brought him to David, and gave him bread, and he did eat; and they made him drink water;
12 And they gave him a piece of a cake of figs, and two clusters of raisins: and when he had eaten, his spirit came again to him: for he had eaten no bread, nor drunk any water, three days and three nights.
13 And David said unto him, To whom belongest thou? and whence art thou? And he said, I am a young man of Egypt, servant to an Amalekite; and my master left me, because three days agone I fell sick.
14 We made an invasion upon the south of the Cherethites, and upon the coast which belongeth to Judah, and upon the south of Caleb; and we burned Ziklag with fire.
15 And David said to him, Canst thou bring me down to this company? And he said, Swear unto me by God, that thou wilt neither kill me, nor deliver me into the hands of my master, and I will bring thee down to this company.
16 And when he had brought him down, behold, they were spread abroad upon all the earth, eating and drinking, and dancing, because of all the great spoil that they had taken out of the land of the Philistines, and out of the land of Judah.
17 And David smote them from the twilight even unto the evening of the next day: and there escaped not a man of them, save four hundred young men, which rode upon camels, and fled.
18 And David recovered all that the Amalekites had carried away: and David rescued his two wives.
19 And there was nothing lacking to them, neither small nor great, neither sons nor daughters, neither spoil, nor any thing that they had taken to them: David recovered all."
How well do you think this same David would have done against Goliath had he not been armed with a deadly weapon.  He certainly was nowhere near physically strong enough to take on the almost 10 foot tall giant.  No, he need personal protection.  He rejected military hardware, armor, sword and shield and opted instead for personal protection, a “handgun” if you will.  He killed Goliath and saved his people from the Philistines.
There are times when only force will do.  Here is the Lord’s commandment in Exodus 22: 2 “ If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.”
But one might ask, What about the New Testament?  Are we not commanded to love, forgive and turn the other cheek?
Yes, we are, but we are not commanded to be enslaved by weakness.  If we are enslaved without any means to protect ourselves, how do we deliver the hand of the oppressed from the hand of the wicked?  No, Yeshua says in Luke 22:36: “[Christ] said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Paul says in 1 Timothy 5:8: “8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”
This passage is a very wide intent.  The words “provide not” are all inclusive.  This passage does not define provision as food and shelter. No, this passage is purposely open ended. It means total provision, including protection from whatever may come.  It is foolish not to assume that whatever means of protection it takes to guard ones family is both legitimate and required.
For Paul declares that one who provides not for his family has “denied the faith and is worse than an infidel.”  Infidel means someone who is outside the faith.  Yahweh forbid that we get caught falling short of this mandate to protect our families.  We then are charged to protect our household by whatever means necessary, be it “assault” rifle, or hand gun, or any other weapon essential to the protection of our family.
Others will remind us that our protection is in the strength of the Lord for he will provide all things.  Does that mean we sit down, do nothing, and expect a roof to magically appear over our heads, food to mystically appear on our tables, and money to wondrously show up in our pockets?
What foolishness!  We work to provide a home, food, income and, yes, guns and ammo that we might be able to care for our loved ones needs, comfort, and safety, while keeping in mind that we are also responsible for delivering the downtrodden from the oppressor.
What about turning the other cheek?  Just as in the example above, where the thief is breaking in, we are allowed to use deadly force when it is required.  However, turning the other cheek is applicable for insults, theft, when no life threatening force is presented, etc.  Romans 12 says that we turn the other cheek saving room for the wrath of God.  Romans 13 describes government as that wrath and it carries not the sword in vain.  For they (government) are to be a rewarder of good and a terror to evil.  In fact, that is the test to determine if an entity is just corrupt power or government.
We often hear quoted Romans 13:1-2:
"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.  2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
There are two problems with the way this quote is often used.  First, one must continue reading the rest of the passage which says:
3 "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."
But if what is called “government” is not following the command to be a terror to evil and not a terror to good, not being a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil,” then it is not government by this definition and must be opposed.  Disobedience to tyrants is obedience to Yahweh.
The second problem with this quote is the verbiage. In this passage the word “power” is mistranslated.  Historically we need to remember that King James was at that time in history usurping a throne that was not his.  He had the power to ascend the throne, but not the authority.  Therefore, he often use synonymously the words power and authority.
The word that was translated “power” is not the Greek word dynamis which means power (as in dynamite) but the word exousia which means power derived from just authority.  Therefore, we are to be subject only to power derived from just authority.  If the entity calling itself government does not derive its power from just authority, then it is just tyranny not government.
The federal branch of American government attempting
to disarm one-third of the American government
is not government, but tyranny.
Therefore, I must conclude that any attempt to disarm the people in any way, is sedition because it is in violation of our history, deprives one-third of the government—the people—of a right inherent to all, and despotically limits armaments to only two parts of government.  Further, it nullifies the ability to carry out the divine command to one-third of the American government—the people—to deliver the poor and oppressed from the hand of the wicked.  Additionally such a disarmament dramatically reduces or eliminates one’s ability to protect their family, home and nation.
As a citizen we are bound to protect this nation against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.  Any attempt to disarm We the People of this country is immoral, illegal and therefore violates the First Amendment as well as the Second Amendment, in addition to violating the commandments in the holy scriptures.  To disarm the people is at once an act of war, and, in fact, a coup d'état.  It is treason and sedition against the government of the United States, comprised of We The People.    
Finally, any home that is not prepared to protect its children, women, aged, infirmed, or weak is living in an unbiblical state of wanton disregard of a Biblical edict, historical precedent, and common sense.  As a result, we have not only been given the “right” by Yahweh to keep and bear arms, we have been given the obligation to keep and bear arms both as a spiritual matter and as a matter of U.S. law and historical understanding.