Stop Obama’s Planned Gag Order on Firearm-Related Speech
Posted: June 7, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshatteryTags: 2nd amendment, anti-gun asshattery, anti-gun idiocy, first amendment, free speech, Gun Control, Gun Rights, Nanny State, Obama
Via NRA-ILA
It’s happening again— President Obama is using his imperial pen and telephone to curb your rights and bypass Congress through executive action.
Even as news reports have been highlighting the gun control provisions of the Administration’s “Unified Agenda” of regulatory objectives (see accompanying story), the Obama State Department has been quietly moving ahead with a proposal that could censor online speech related to firearms. This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second. Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published.
To understand the proposal and why it’s so serious, some background information is necessary.
For the past several years, the Administration has been pursuing a large-scale overhaul of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The Act regulates the movement of so-called “defense articles” and “defense services” in and out of the United States. These articles and services are enumerated in a multi-part “U.S. Munitions List,” which covers everything from firearms and ammunition (and related accessories) to strategic bombers. The transnational movement of any defense article or service on the Munitions List presumptively requires a license from the State Department. Producers of such articles and services, moreover, must register with the U.S. Government and pay a hefty fee for doing so.
Also regulated under ITAR are so-called “technical data” about defense articles. These include, among other things, “detailed design, development, production or manufacturing information” about firearms or ammunition. Specific examples of technical data are blueprints, drawings, photographs, plans, instructions or documentation.
In their current form, the ITAR do not (as a rule) regulate technical data that are in what the regulations call the “public domain.” Essentially, this means data “which is published and which is generally accessible or available to the public” through a variety of specified means. These include “at libraries open to the public or from which the public can obtain documents.” Many have read this provision to include material that is posted on publicly available websites, since most public libraries these days make Internet access available to their patrons.
The ITAR, however, were originally promulgated in the days before the Internet. Some State Department officials now insist that anything published online in a generally-accessible location has essentially been “exported,” as it would be accessible to foreign nationals both in the U.S. and overseas.
With the new proposal published on June 3, the State Department claims to be “clarifying” the rules concerning “technical data” posted online or otherwise “released” into the “public domain.” To the contrary, however, the proposal would institute a massive new prior restraint on free speech. This is because all such releases would require the “authorization” of the government before they occurred. The cumbersome and time-consuming process of obtaining such authorizations, moreover, would make online communication about certain technical aspects of firearms and ammunition essentially impossible.
Penalties for violations are severe and for each violation could include up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $1 million. Civil penalties can also be assessed. Each unauthorized “export,” including to subsequent countries or foreign nationals, is also treated as a separate violation.
Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities. Prior restraints of the sort contemplated by this regulation are among the most disfavored regulations of speech under First Amendment case law.
But then, when did the U.S. Constitution ever deter Barack Obama from using whatever means are at his disposal to exert his will over the American people and suppress firearm ownership throughout the nation?
Time is of the essence! Public comment will be accepted on the proposed gag order until August 3, 2015. Comments may be submitted online at regulations.gov or via e-mail at DDTCPublicComments@state.gov with the subject line, ‘‘ITAR Amendment—Revisions to Definitions; Data Transmission and Storage.”
School is No Longer Conducive to Human Biology
Posted: June 7, 2015 by gamegetterII in Uncategorized7 Anti-gun Myths That Need To Be Debunked Immediately…..
Posted: June 7, 2015 by gamegetterII in UncategorizedFreedom Is Just Another Word...
7 Anti-gun Myths That Need To Be Debunked Immediately | 2nd Amendment Fight.
1. “Assault Weapons”
2. “High Capacity Magazines”
3. Gun Show “Loophole”
4. Mass Shootings Are Not Increasing:
5. Anti-Gun Organizations Lump in Suicide & Injuries With Crime Data:
6. Too Many Are Being Killed:
7. False Zero-Sum Dichotomy – “Either/Or”:
BONUS: We Need More Laws:
What Waco Police Still Won’t Reveal About the Biker-Gang Shootout
Posted: June 7, 2015 by gamegetterII in Uncategorizedh/t NC Renegade

The revolutionary development of modern weapons within a world divided by serious ideological differences has produced a crisis in human history. In order to overcome the danger of nuclear war now confronting mankind, the United States has introduced at the Sixteenth General Assembly of the United Nations a Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.
This new program provides for the progressive reduction of the war-making capabilities of nations and the simultaneous strengthening of international institutions to settle disputes and maintain the peace. It sets forth a series of comprehensive measures which can and should be taken in order to bring about a world in which there will be freedom from war and security for all states. It is based on three principles deemed essential to the achievement of practical progress in the disarmament field:
First, there must be immediate disarmament action:
A strenuous and uninterrupted effort must be made toward the goal of general and complete disarmament; at the same time, it is important that specific measures be put into effect as soon as possible.
Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective international controls:
The control organization must have the manpower, facilities, and effectiveness to assure that limitations or reductions take place as agreed. It must also be able to certify to all states that retained forces and armaments do not exceed those permitted at any stage of the disarmament process.
Third, adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established:
There is an inseparable relationship between the scaling down of national armaments on the one hand and the building up of international peace-keeping machinery and institutions on the other. Nations are unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of alternative ways to safeguard their legitimate interests. This can only be achieved through the progressive strengthening of international institutions under the United Nations and by creating a United Nations Peace Force to enforce the peace as the disarmament process proceeds.
There follows a summary of the principal provisions of the United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World. The full text of the program is contained in an appendix to this pamphlet.
SUMMARY
DISARMAMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.
In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:
- The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;
- The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
- The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;
- The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to ensure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.
Read the rest @ http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/06/04/united-states-announces-world-police-force/
Senator Whitehouse: Use the RICO law against climate “Deniers”
Posted: June 6, 2015 by gamegetterII in UncategorizedYou put down the newspaper or turn off your computer because you can only take so much. Day after day an endless litany of idiocy and corruption. You know it can’t last, but when will it end? That’s the consolation—it can’t last—and there must be, sooner or later, some measure of justice. Something will happen that’s beyond the control of the controllers, the relentless grabbers of power and wealth, and their castles of cards will come tumbling down. There will be payback; they will get what they deserve—finally.
When you were a kid, what made you the maddest? The obnoxious know-it-alls who bossed you around? The bullies who took your stuff and humiliated you? The two-faced apple-polishing teachers’ pets? Maybe a day came when you had just had enough. You told a know-it-all off, got an apple-polisher in trouble, threw the first punch and gave a bully a real fight…
View original post 1,379 more words
The odds for you getting killed by a swordfish are highly, highly unlikely considering these beasts thrive in the darkest depths of the ocean most of the time. But every once in a while, a broadbill finds itself shallow and close to shore. A few days ago, one popped up in Hawaii’s Honokohau Harbor. According to this story on Theguardian.com, a fish in the wrong place at the wrong time caused a tragic ending for veteran charter captain Randy Llanes. Per the article, Llanes spotted the sword swimming near his boat and jumped in with his speargun. He nailed the fish, but during the tussle, the spear wrapped around the anchor line from a boat moored nearby. The fish went wild trying to get loose, and ended up ramming Llanes square in the chest.

From the story:
Although Llanes was quickly pulled from the water and emergency personnel arrived minutes later, CPR attempts proved unable to revive him, according to the state Department of Land and Natural Resources. Shortly afterward Llanes was pronounced dead at the hospital, where a large crowd of people gathered to pay their condolences.
A Hawaii native, Llanes had worked for more than 18 years as captain for a charter fishing business, and had more than 25 years of experience fishing in the archipelago’s waters. “Hawaii is one of those rare places where sea monsters still exist and world records can still be broken,” he wrote on his company’s website. “My greatest pleasure is being able to share the excitement and natural wonder of the Hawaiian offshore fishing experience with others.”
I’ve caught a few swordfish and I can tell you that their bills are flat, blunt, sand paper-like, nasty, splintery weapons. I cannot imagine what it would be like to get hit hard enough to drive one into your person. Godspeed, Mr. Llanes.





























