Tempus Fugit

fuse
Porretto: LifeDeath

Bob Owens via Twitter: “There is no plainer way to say this: A govt that uses the power of the state against the people is a tyranny, and a threat to liberty.”

Hofmann: Vicious dogs and tyrannical governments – Guns are needed for both

California/LA Times: “…Californians who want to buy ammunition would have to submit personal information and a $50 fee for a background check by the state, under a bill passed by the Senate. The state Department of Justice would determine whether buyers have a criminal record, severe mental illness or a restraining order that would disqualify them from owning guns. Ammo shops would check the name on buyers’ driver’s licenses against a state list of qualified purchasers…”

21 responses to “Tempus Fugit

  1. B Woodman

    RE: the Kalifornication ammo requirements: Sounds like a good time for someone in Nevada near the KA border to start a little side smuggling operation.
    Two thoughts –
    #1 – know who you’re dealing with (as much as reasonably possible)
    #2 – transact your business well inside the NV side, away from far-reaching border snooping methods.
    (See this all the time here in UT, which doesn’t allow certain fireworks, but WY does. So all the idiots that go and shop JUST INSIDE the border, where the UT po-po can scope and record the license plates, are just begging to be pulled over and searched when they cross the UT line.

  2. I sure am glad we left that reeking Communist cesspool. At least we will be able to point at the DPRK as the example of what the Democrat Party wants to do to us.

  3. That’s why I left. After 34 years I couldn’t stomach anymore of that statist BS. Texas isn’t perfect but I can get by and its where I was born and raised.

    • In spite of all the evidence to the contrary apparently some people are STILL under the impression that the *rule of law* still applies here in the good ol’ USS of A. srsly, U need to get up to speed, somehow you have fallen way behind and that may be to your own peril. just sayin’…..

      “The only thing a thug recognizes is the threat upon his own life.”
      –gs, 2013

  4. Subject: Fw: Fwd: THE DICK ACT OF 1909 !! – This is legit and not a joke – don’t be concerned because of the name

    Wonder who in Washington is supposed to keep up with all the laws that have been passed (and ignored) throughout the years?

    THE BILL was passed back in 1902 and grants full rights to anyone who wants to own as many guns as they can afford. Any movement to limit guns or magazines will be in direct violation of this law. Pass it around.

    THE DICK ACT OF 1902! (BY CHARLES WILLIAM FREDERICK DICK)

    ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS LAW?
    Here’s a Dirty Little Secret for ALL to Read and Digest!

    DICK ACT OF 1902 – CAN’T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) – PROTECTION AGAINST TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT .

    IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS COUNTING ON THE FACT THAT THE AMERICAN CITIZENS DON’T KNOW THIS, THEIR RIGHTS AND THE CONSTITUTION. DON’T PROVE THEM RIGHT.

    THE DICK ACT OF 1902 ALSO KNOWN AS THE EFFICIENCY OF MILITIA BILL H.R. 11654 OF JUNE 28, 1902 and INVALIDATES ALL SO-CALLED GUN-CONTROL LAWS.

    It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

    ** SPREAD THIS TO EVERYONE **

    The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and Di strict of Columbia;the unorganized militia; and the regular army.

    The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

    The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

    The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

    The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.

    Source…

    http://www.civilrightstaskforce.info/gun_control_forbidden.htm

    Get this message out to all your email contacts.

    It’s time to learn about your rights.

    (Thus making all California (Colorado & others) gun & magazine limiting laws illegal !!!)

    I’m not so sure the current administration KNOWS what the laws, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence say.

    But it doesn’t matter to them anyway. He and his minions certainly don’t have any respect for them or us and will continue to

    do whatever they can get away with to further their cause of gaining complete control

    Charles William Frederick Dick (November 3, 1858 – March 13, 1945) was a Republican politician from Ohio. He served in the United States House of Representatives and U.S. Senate.

    I was curious as to who was the Dick in the .. DICK act of 1909 i found out little about himhttp:// http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/us_constitution/gun_control/news.php?q=1237163642

    but i found out a little more about the Dick Act

    Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, “the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States.”

    The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

    During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.

    The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.

    Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840which states: “The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States.” In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, “that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it.”

    “This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power.”

    The Honorable William Gordon

  5. Anonymous

    KMA Kalifornia. I will never spend another dime in that state.

  6. DWEEZIL THE WEASEL

    Just when the Kailfornian gun owners thought it could not get any worse, BOHICA! This reminds me of the Intolerable Acts prior to the dust-up in April of 1775. If I remember correctly, these despotic acts were met with open defiance by all of the other Colonies, in one way or another. Kalifornia is looking more and more like Atlas Shrugged. I see quite a few folks taking the good old capitalist initiative and starting smuggling operations.

  7. If the people ran those same check on their govt employees they fix a lot of problems in that state.. until then we can pray for it to slide into the ocean southern tip first.

  8. Not “fugit” enough for me.

  9. From Porretto’s site:
    “….speech it deems “inflammatory against Muslims” is unprotected and will be prosecuted….”
    ===================

    Can someone ‘splain to me how this rotten assed gov’t can protect muslims and out of the other corner of it’s disgusting yap claim to be fighting a global war against terror by muslims?

    What am I missing here?

    I don’t watch TV or listen to radio or read newspapers, nor will I ever, so I just don’t get it.

    • Anonymous

      “Can someone ‘splain to me” Here’s the short version Lucy. In the 1980s the CIA organized Al Quida with Ben Laden to fight the Russians in Afgan. Then the US gives 10billion/yr to Pakistan, which they use to form the taliban so as to steal Afgan from the Afganies. This enables the CIA to control the opium trade, the hidden source of CIA money.USA also supports Muslim Brotherhood to spread chaos everywhere. CIA then does 9/11/2001 and US moves mightily toward tyranny.Muslims are used to steal your freedom just like

      • Yeah, I know the history, and know the answer to my question. I was just looking for confirmation to what appears to be outright fraud right in front of everybody’s faces but very few want to see.

        “The politicians can’t buy enough protection from what awaits them.”
        –gs, 2013

  10. I stopped reading Owens months ago.

    CIII

  11. Bill Harzia

    They can’t stop dope smuggling into California. What makes them think they can stop ammo smuggling?

  12. Jack JD Montana

    Owens has his problems. I reminded him of something when he said Adam Kokesh’s actions were provocative and moronic (and yes, marching into a perfect kill box for provocateurs/snipers the leftoids were all practically begging the feds use against the ‘insurrectionists’ is moronic). I told him that it will be his blog post about patriot insurgents turning out the lights to a major city that will be pointed to by the SPLC (DHS front) and the DHS should they desire a big time martial law enabling false flag — or at least get the Guard and Northcom troops in front of every transformer.

    Ditto for Mike Vanderbough of Sipsey Street Irregulars who routinely denounces Alex Jones. I don’t agree with all of Jones stuff and maybe he peddles vitamins and other stuff of questionable value to fund his operation. Nonetheless, I reminded Vanderbough that his ‘smuggling’ stuff might just as easily get him arrested on a ridiculous charge as Kokesh was snatched by the feds during a marijuana rally that he wasn’t partaking in.

    Those who live in glass houses — you know the rest. And no I have no idea about Vanderbough’s fight with the proprietor of this site nor do I care. I’ll only say that putting all Patriots in one easy to yardfarm location may not be the best idea nor is trying to make it about being white as opposed to being free. I know in Texas at least there are Hispanics who will fight to keep their guns, particularly on the border, and probably in New Mexico too where the sheriff’s vowed not to obey any gun confiscation acts.

  13. Jack JD Montana

    PS the comment above may be all well and good and maybe there is such a law on the books but since when has this whole corrupt bunch given a damn about the law?

  14. Jack JD Montana

    That is to say, Mr. Kokesh has even admitted it was a shitty idea after Oath Keepers told him publically they wouldn’t back the open carry march from VA to D.C. Now he’s urging activists to do open carry at multiple state capitols which makes a hell of a lot more sense.

    • Mr. Jack JD Montana….the Oathkeepers did not support the Vanderbough initiative on the Potomac across from D.C., 2-3 years ago. Perfectly legal. But Stewart Rhodes and his band of hypocrites did then as they’re doing now. I have little use for Oathkeepers and next to zero use for badged thugs except to use them as a bad example.

      Remember….there were no good Nazis.

      • ‘cept when they facilitated Franco’s victory over the Reds in Spain, stuck it to the French, and killed a lot of communists. Too few, unfortunately.

  15. Battlefield USA

    Remember, the ammo shelves are bare in MexiKaliForniKation too and get picked clean when the rounds come in. And… our own gun shows have set records in attendance. Besides, I like this desert. 😉

  16. What is the strength of the Left? Unity, at least until the Revolution succeeds. Their motto “No Enemies to the Left” expresses this. Imagine if the Right could evolve a similar ethos – especially now since that we are the under dogs and the Revolution from the Top has now become the status quo. Or is calling other people “Nazis” just too much fun?