The Assault Weapons Ban Didn’t Work Then and It Won’t Work Now

Diane sounds like Hitler. Didn’t she learn anything from history?

HERE’S AN EASY ANSWER TO THE WHOLE THING.

Just like in HUNTING SEASON, everybody steps out the door at a SPECIFIC TIME on a SPECIFIC DATE carrying their loaded weapons.

Get the message out by tweet, facebook (that’s a laugh) e-mail, phone calls, text messages or whatever means you can come up with.

BECAUSE OF THE URGENCY, We need to ACT SOON.

We’re NOT looking to cause ANY TROUBLE, just stand on our Constitutional RIGHTS.

DAY: Saturday………..DATE: JAN. 26, 2013…………TIME: 9:00 a.m. EST

Just like in HUNTING SEASON, everybody steps out the door at a SPECIFIC TIME on a SPECIFIC DATE carrying their loaded weapons. ONLY THIS TIME, PATRIOTS………We NEVER stop carrying them.

WE are NOT the LAW BREAKERS. ANYONE trying to take OUR weapons is the lawbreaker.

Charge them with TREASON and make a CITIZENS ARREST. It is the COPS DUTY to place them under arrest and take them down and BOOK ‘EM.

We WILL put them on trial for TREASON and if they are found GUILTY, we WILL ask for the DEATH PENALTY. That’s what we do with TRAITORS. We LEGALLY put them to DEATH.

Do that a FEW times and they’ll leave us alone about our GUN RIGHTS.

Within the last few weeks, two people have been killed by subway trains. In both cases it was reported they were pushed onto the tracks by people exhibiting signs of mental illness. Ok Dianne, get your ugly carcass back to work and start drafting a bill to ban those assault trains. By the way, it is also reported that you carry a loaded .38 in your purse. What are YOU afraid of? Hmmmmm?

If Ghandi were alive they would suspend his acount too.

Further proof that liberals only serve their agenda in defiance of the facts.

Feinstein is another liberal jerkoff that can’t tell firearms from a campfire. Most of the slaughtering in mass killings are done with PISTOLS. Assault weapons are carried with them with bulletproof vests and ammo as all part of the statement . The jerkoff liberals immediately go on the attack on weapons that has nothing to do with what happened. Moreover I am waiting for the day when someone walks into a church or McDonalds with a flamethrower and starts a barbeque on unsuspecting patrons. Then there will be a ban on everything from zippo lighters to bic lighters and you will need a permit for a book of matches. In Typical liberal fashion they are always trying to attach a solution
to a problem that has nothing to do with the problem.

The problem lies with a long list of
smaller problems over a long period of time since the early 1960’s till now
with the dehumanizing of human life, the disrespect for life, the culture of
death that pervades movies and games, and the list goes on. Here is a link that
explains it well. Note that Dr Welner explains
that guns have been around for a long time, but these type of mass killings have
stated for the reasons noted above among other things he lists. Psychiatrist Dr.Welner: Why CT Shooter Adam Lanza killed – YouTube – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU24i3Th27U

Lastly Obama added. “This week I called on Congress to take up and pass common-sense legislation that has the support of the majority of the American people, including banning the sale of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips, and making sure criminals can’t take advantage of legal loopholes to get their hands on a gun.”

This proves Obama’s credulous nature (like all democrats) on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips, the illusion that take advantage of legal loopholes.

Criminals don’t use anything LEGAL they get guns ammo and clips ILLEGALLY like the drugs they also sell and distribute. What is needed is an enforcement of over 600 existing gun laws that could be used in the prosecution of these criminals that liberals refuse to enforce but instead use the current chaos created by their non-enforcement of existing laws to push their doctrine of elimination of the second amendment.

What is needed is real conservatives to stand on principle and existing laws and stop this liberal nonsense that is also pervasive in their train wreck of an economy under their watch.

Ban gun free zones,institute mandatory concealed carry for teachers,I would think most own & know how to use guns.Mandate 1 armed officer at each school.

Let me start by saying I despise Diane Feinstien. I don’t know her, i’ve never met her but she’s the kind of person who has no respect for the rights of individuals who have harmed no-one and whose only fault is they don’t fit into her arrogant little worldview of perfection. She is a small worthless little human being who’s only claim to fame is being elected into a position of power. Do us all a favor madam, GO AWAY OR GO TO HELL! Molon Labe!

So put that in your pipe and smoke it Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Dick Durbin, President Barack Obama, Congressman Chuck Schummer and all of you other anti gun Liberal Progressive Legislatures. You can’t stop a mentally impaired person from going on a shooting Spree especially in a “Gun Free Zone”, otherwise known as a Safety Free Zone no matter how many anti-gun laws you enact, because a mentally impaired person does not care one iota about your stupid laws.

What part about this don’t you understand. Mentally impaired people don’t care what laws you enact, only law abiding people who would not go on a shooting rampage care about laws, and these are not the people you and the rest of the nation need to be worried about.

Violation of Oath of Office – Senator
Dianne Feinstein

The
Constitution requires that all members of Congress must take an oath of
office to support the Constitution before assuming office. In order to comply
with the Constitution, Congress has enacted federal laws to execute and enforce
this constitutional requirement.

Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is
divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the
law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C.
3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are
required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C.
3333 requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the
oath of office required by 5 U.S.C.
3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their
tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C.
7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation
of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government
(including members of Congress) to “advocate the
overthrow of our constitutional form of government”. The fourth federal law,
18 U.S.C.
1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C.
7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a
fine.

The Constitution requires that all members of
Congress must take an oath of office to support the Constitution before
assuming office. In order to comply with the Constitution, Congress has enacted
federal laws to execute and enforce this constitutional requirement.

Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into
four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for
purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual
oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office.
5 U.S.C. 3333 requires members of Congress sign
an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate
that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part
of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a
federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone
employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional
form of government”. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation
of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from
office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of
enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. One provision of Executive Order 10450 specifies it is a
violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the
oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the
government of the United States
by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the
Constitution of the United
States. It can only be “altered” by
constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government
officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331which alters the form of government
other by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

5 U.S.C. 7311 clearly specifies it is a criminal
violation for any member of Congress to advocate the overthrow of our constitutional
form of government or our Constitution. The definition of the word “advocate” is to: “defend by argument before a
tribunal or the public: support or recommend publicly.

Startling evidence suggests that the U.S. Gun
Control Act of 1968

was lifted, almost in its entirety, from Nazi legislation.

Original article appeared in Guns and Ammo Magazine May 1993

Are you tired of being told that “gun control” is a chronic pain that
you have to accept because there’s no cure? Do you — a law abiding person –
want to be free: to own whichever firearms you want to own, regardless of where
in America
you live; from waiting periods, gun bans, magazine capacity restrictions, etc.;
to spend your time on the range or in the field, rather than fighting “gun
control”?

Are you tired of giving hard earned bucks to efforts that have at best only slowed
the gun grabbers’ push toward firearms registration and confiscation? If you
have had enough of death by a thousand cuts, you are ready to take action to
wipe out “gun control” — now.

Members of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) consider
“gun control” to be an aggressive cancer. JPFO has a cure, a way to
destroy “gun control”. JPFO has hard evidence that shows that the
Nazi Weapons Law (March 18, 1938) is the source of the U.S Gun Control Act of
1968 (GCA ’68). Adolph Hitler signed the Nazi Weapons Law. The Gestapo (Nazi
National Secret Police) enforced it. In “Gun Control”: Gateway to
Tyranny we present the official German text of the Nazi Weapons Law and a
side-by-side translation into English. Even more deadly: a side-by-side,
section-by-section comparison of the GCA ’68 with the Nazi Weapons Law. If you
have this in your hands, no one can tell you that you’re imagining things.

The clincher: JPFO knows who implanted into American law cancerous ideas from
the Nazi Weapons Law.

The likely culprit is a former senator, now deceased. We have documentary proof
– see below — that he had the original text of the Nazi Weapons Law in his
possession 4 months before the bill that became GCA ’68 was signed into law.

This former senator was a senior member of the U.S.
team that helped to prosecute Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg, Germany,
in 1945-46. That is probably where he found out about the Nazi Weapons Law. He
may have gotten a copy of it then, or at a later date. We cannot imagine why
any U.S.
lawmaker would own original texts of Nazi laws. To find out his name, read on.

With this hard evidence in your hands and in your head, you can destroy
cancerous “gun control”. You can challenge anyone who backs “gun
control”. You can show them the Nazi ideas, line by line.

The parallels between the Nazi law and GCA ’68 will leap at you from the page.
For example, law abiding firearm owners in Illinois,
Massachusetts and New Jersey must carry identification cards
based on formats from the Nazi Weapons Law. Nazi based laws have no place in America.
Thousands of Americans died or were wounded in the war to wipe out the Nazis.
They did not suffer or die so that Hitler’s ideas could live on in America and
kill more Americans. Remember Killeen,
Texas! The 23 who died in Luby’s
Cafeteria there died because they obeyed Nazi inspired “gun control”
laws. The law forced them, unarmed, to face an armed madman.

To destroy “gun control” before more law abiding Americans are
murdered by criminals or madmen helped by “gun control”, you need to
get hold of the evidence as presented in “Gun Control”: Gateway to
Tyranny. You can then challenge the media, the most aggressive backers of
“gun control”. Ask media personalities in your city or town why they
back Nazi based laws. You can help to erase “gun control”, Hitler’s
last legacy.

GCA ’68 puts your life at risk right now. You have a constitutional civil right
to be armed in order to protect yourself, because under U.S law the police have
no duty to protect the average person:

“There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state (or
Federal) against being murdered by criminals or madmen. It is monstrous if the
state fails to protect its residents against such predators but it does not
violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, or, we suppose, any
other provision of the Constitution. The Constitution is a charter of negative
liberties: it tells the state (gov’t) to let people alone; it does not require
the federal government or the state to provide services, even so elementary a
service as maintaining law and order”

(Bowers v. DeVito, U.S., Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 686F.2d 616
[1982]).

See also U.S. Supreme Court cases of Will
v. Michigan State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989) and DeShaney v. Winnebago
County Board of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) (State has no duty to
protect its citizens from each other).

The Supreme Court last dealt with this issue in 1856; the 1982 decision
states the position in modern language. The laws of virtually every state
parallel federal law (see JPFO Special Report “Dial 911 and Die!” covered in
Guns & Ammo, July 1992). This has been so ever since the Constitution was
adopted in 1791. As a result, the framers of the Second Amendment deliberately created
(guaranteed) an individual civil right to be armed. It is your only reliable
defense against criminals. GCA ’68 ties your hands and keeps you from carrying
out your legal duty to ensure your own self defense. GCA ’68 thus undermines a
pillar of U.S.
law and helps criminals to kill law abiding Americans. Hitler would be pleased.

Thus, GCA ’68 marked a new approach to “gun control”. It replaced the
Federal Firearms Act (June 30, 1938), which was based on the federal power to
regulate interstate commerce. The 1938 law required firearms dealers to get a
federal license (which then cost $1). Only dealers could ship firearms across
state lines. Ordinary people could receive shipments from dealers.

In GCA ’68 the government required that in almost all cases only dealers could
send and receive firearms across state lines. This ended “mail order”
sales of firearms by law abiding persons who are not licensed dealers. GCA ’68
hits you even harder. Congress gave federal bureaucrats in Washington D.C.,
the power to decide what kinds of firearms you can own. The framers of GCA ’68
borrowed an idea — that certain firearms are “hunting weapons” –
from the Nazi Weapons Law (Section 21 and Section 32 of the Regulations, page
61 and page 73, respectively, of “Gun Control”: Gateway to Tyranny).
The equivalent U.S.
term, “sporting purpose,” was used to classify firearms. But it was
not defined anywhere in GCA ’68. Thus, bureaucrats were empowered to ban whole
classes of firearms. They have, in fact, done so.

We wanted to know the source of these new ideas. On reading “Dial 911 and
Die!” a JPFO member told us he had seen an article — by Alan Stang in
‘Review of the News,’ October 4, 1967 (pages 15-20) — the author of which felt
that the Nazi Weapons Law was the model for GCA ’68. We found the article. But
Stang did not reproduce the Nazi law, so we could not check his conclusions.

We started to hunt for the text of the Nazi Weapons Law. We eventually found
it, in the law library of an Ivy League university.

Until 1943-44, the German government published its laws and regulations in the
‘Reichsgesetzblatt,’ roughly the equivalent of the U.S. Federal Register.
Carefully shelved by law librarians, the 1938 issues of this German government
publication had gathered a lot of dust. In the ‘Reichsgesetzblatt’ issue for
the week of March 21, 1938, was the official text of the Weapons Law (March 18,
1938). It gave Hitler’s Nazi party a stranglehold on the Germans, many of whom
did not support the Nazis. We found that the Nazis did not invent “gun
control” in Germany.
The Nazis inherited gun control and then perfected it: they invented handgun
control.

The Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 replaced a Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April
13, 1928. The 1928 law was enacted by a center-right, freely elected German
government that wanted to curb “gang activity,” violent street fights
between Nazi party and Communist party thugs. All firearm owners and their
firearms had to be registered. Sound familiar? “Gun control” did not
save democracy in Germany.
It helped to make sure that the toughest criminals, the Nazis, prevailed.

The Nazis inherited lists of firearm owners and their firearms when they
‘lawfully’ took over in March 1933. The Nazis used these inherited registration
lists to seize privately held firearms from persons who were not
“reliable.” Knowing exactly who owned which firearms, the Nazis had
only to revoke the annual ownership permits or decline to renew them.

In 1938, five years after taking power, the Nazis enhanced the 1928 law. The
Nazi Weapons Law introduced handgun control. Firearms ownership was restricted
to Nazi party members and other “reliable” people.

The 1938 Nazi law barred Jews from businesses involving firearms. On November
10. 1938 — one day after the Nazi party terror squads (the SS) savaged
thousands of Jews, synagogues and Jewish businesses throughout Germany — new
regulations under the Weapons Law specifically barred Jews from owning any
weapons, even clubs or knives.

Given the parallels between the Nazi Weapons Law and the GCA ’68, we concluded
that the framers of the GCA ’68 — lacking any basis in American law to sharply
cut back the civil rights of law abiding Americans — drew on the Nazi Weapons
Law of 1938.

Finding the Nazi Weapons Law whetted our appetite. We wanted to know who
implanted this Nazi cancer in America.
We began by probing the backgrounds of lawmakers who championed “gun
control”. We focused on those whose bills became part of GCA ’68. GCA ’68
as enacted closely tracks proposals dating to August 1963. We felt that if the
culprit were a lawmaker — or a congressional staffer — he or she would know Germany, German
law and possibly even speak German. He or she probably would have spent time in
Germany
on business or during military service. Alternatively, if the culprit were not
a member of Congress or a staffer, there would be testimony at the hearings to
that effect.

Most potential suspects were quickly eliminated; they had no apparent ties to Germany. But
one lawmaker caught our attention.

An old “Who’s Who” entry showed he had been a senior member of the U.S. team that prosecuted German war criminals
at Nuremberg in
1945-46. Thus, he had lived in Germany
just after the Nazi period. His official duties required him to look at Nazi
records, including Nazi laws. In 1963 he led the effort to greatly expand the
Federal Firearms Act of 1938.

We then got a break. We told a legal scholar of our findings. He was intrigued.
He sent us an extract from the record of hearings held a few months prior to
the enactment of GCA ’68. At the end of June 1968, the Senate Judiciary
Subcommittee to investigate Juvenile Delinquency — chaired by Thomas J. Dodd
(D-CT) — held hearings on bills: (1) “To Require the Registration of
Firearms” (S.3604). (2) “To Disarm Lawless Persons” (S.3634) and
(3) “To Provide for the Establishment of a National Firearms
Registry” (S.3637), among others.

U.S. Representative John Dingell (D-MI) testified at these Senate hearings on
“gun control”. Senator Joseph D. Tydings (D-MD) chaired some of these
hearings, in Dodd’s absence.

Rep. Dingell expressed concern that if firearms registration were required, it
might lead to confiscation of firearms, as had happened in Nazi Germany.
Tydings angrily accused Rep. Dingell of using “scare tactics”:

“Are you inferring that our system here, gun registration or licensing,
would in any way be comparable to the Nazi regime in Germany, where they had a
secret police, and a complete takeover?”

Rep. Dingell backed away.

(Hearings before the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the
Committee on the Judiciary, 90th Congress, 2nd Session, June 26, 27 and 28 and
July 8, 9 and 10. 1968, pp. 479-80, 505-6 cited as Subcommittee Hearings.)

Tydings later inserted into the hearing record various documents,
“concerning the history of Nazism and gun confiscation.”

Exhibit No. 62 (see reproduction) is fascinating. This letter — dated July 12,
1968 — is to Subcommittee Chairman Dodd from Lewis C. Coffin, Law Librarian at
the Library of Congress. Coffin wrote:

” … we are enclosing herewith a translation of the Law on Weapons of
March 18, 1938, prepared by Dr. William Solyom-Fekete of [the European Law
Division -- ed.] as well as the Xerox of the original German text which you
supplied” (Subcommittee Hearings, p. 489, emphasis added).

This letter makes it public knowledge that at the end of June 1968 — 4 months
before GCA ’68 was enacted — Senator Thomas J. Dodd, now deceased, personally
owned a copy of the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law.

Why did Dodd own the original German text of any Nazi law? Why did he make
known that he owned it?

The Library of Congress then had (and still has) the ’Reichsgesetzblatt’ in its
collection. The Library of Congress translator, Dr. Solyom-Fekete, could easily
have used the Library of Congress’ own copy.

Any member of Congress who wanted to read the Nazi Weapons Law need only have
asked for it to be produced from the shelves of the Library of Congress and for
it to be translated by Library of Congress experts. Why should any member of
Congress ever have owned the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law?

Without access to Tom Dodd’s personal papers, archived under his heirs’
control, we unfortunately cannot offer definite answers.

Dodd could have acquired the German text of the Nazi Weapons Law during his
time at Nuremberg.
But he had no need to do so.

Dodd did not personally handle the prosecution of Nazi Interior Minister
Wilhelm Frick, who signed the Nazi Weapons Law. The case against Frick was
presented by Robert M.W. Kempner, Assistant Trial Counsel for the United States
(see ’Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military
Tribunal,’ cited as TMWC, Vol. V, pp. 352-67, Nuremberg, Germany, 1947).

Nor should the Nazi Weapons Law otherwise have come to Dodd’s attention. The
Nazi Weapons Law was not used as evidence against Frick (see Kempner’s speech,
TMWC, V, pp. 352-67 and ‘Index of Laws, Decrees, Orders, Directives, and the
Administration of Justice in Nazi Germany and Nazi Dominated Countries’, TMWC,
Vol. XXIII, pp. 430-33). The Nazi Weapons Law is not listed among documents
submitted as evidence to the Tribunal by the American prosecutors (see Vol.
XXIV, pp. 98-169).

The prosecutors at Nuremberg
doubtless knew of the Nazi Weapons Law. They probably saw it in the
’Reichsgesetzblatt.’ On the same day that Nazi Interior Minister Frick signed
the Weapons Law, March 18, 1938, he signed another law governing security
measures in newly annexed Austria.
This law concerning Austria appeared in the ‘Reichsgesetzblatt’ — directly in
front of the Weapons Law — and was introduced into evidence at Nuremberg
(’Reichsgesetzblatt’ 1938, I, p. 262; the Nazi Weapons Law was published in the
same volume, p. 265; see TMWC, Vol. V, p.358 for reference to law concerning
Austria).

Thus, the Nazi Weapons Law appeared to have no historical merit at Nuremberg and should not
have attracted anyone’s notice, certainly not to the extent of causing anyone
to want to keep a copy of it as a separate document.

If Dodd got his copy of the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law during
his time at Nuremberg, it likely was part of a collection of documents, for
example, issues of the ’Reichsgesetzblatt’.

But if he acquired the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law after his
service at Nuremberg,
he must have done so for a very specific reason. The Nazi Weapons Law plainly
did not figure at Nuremberg.

We may safely conclude it had little, if any, interest for those interested in
the history of the Nazis’ rise to power. For example, the Nazi Weapons Law is
not mentioned at all in William L. Shirer’s very thorough study of Nazi
Germany, ’The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich’ (Simon and Schuster, New York,
1950).

At the hearings held by Dodd’s subcommittee at the end of June 1968, Rep.
Dingell had objected to the firearms registration provision then being
discussed. Dodd may have offered his copy of the Nazi Weapons Law to show that
the specific proposal did not resemble anything in the Nazi law.

He may not have realized that he was revealing a broader truth; that the whole
fabric of GCA ’68 was based on the Nazi Weapons Law, even if the specific
registration proposal was not so based.

Alternatively, Dodd may not have cared whether or not anyone knew that he had
the German text of the Nazi Weapons Law. He doubtless knew that months would
pass before the hearing record was printed and so generally available for
scrutiny. Thus, even if anyone then noticed the parallels between the two laws,
the bill would already have become law.

Rep. Dingell does not appear to have pursued the matter: the firearms
registration provision was not included in GCA ’68. The Congress was stampeded
on “gun control” by public enthusiasm. Martin Luther King had been
murdered on April 4, 1968, and Robert F. Kennedy had been murdered on June 6,
1968.

We are not the first to have seen this hearing record. But we appear to be the
first to have recognized its importance. This hearing record suggests strongly
that the late Senator Thomas J. Dodd (D-CT) himself implanted the Nazi Weapons
Law into American law, or, at very least, helped others to do so.

Now you know the ugly truth about the roots of GCA ’68. But you need to see –
with your own eyes — the hard evidence of the Nazi roots of “gun
control” in America
presented in “Gun Control”: Gateway to Tyranny.

If you want to destroy “gun control”, you can use this book to do it.

The Nazi Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, cleared the way for World War II and
Nazi genocide against the Jews, Gypsies and 7,000,000 other people.

The 1938 Nazi Weapons Law that disarmed, enslaved & murdered the men above,
is alive and well in the United States, and is called, “The Gun Control
act of 1968″, and is enforced by the modern day Gestapo, known as the
“Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE).”

Does a ban on handguns and assault weapons work? Look at Mexico. They ban all weapons. Look at Chicago. Over 500 murdered in 2012, mostly with handguns. Most multiple shootings occur in states with gun bans. In Texas we have a law allowing concealed handgun licenses. Our city is the safest city in the USA, with over 14,000 CHLs. Across the border is the most violent city in the Americas with over 11,000 killed in the last 6 years. mostly with assault weapons, and with strict gun control laws. In England, they passed laws banning guns. The bad guys went wild, with armed assaults and home invasions. Now the Bobbies (their version of cops), who traditionally did not carry firearms, are now armed, to protect themselves and the public. So you figure.

Don’t try to confuse them with facts. Their minds are made up.

Thank you for the informative article – great work!

I highly recommend that you guys link to the Virginia Citizens Defense Legue (VCDL). They have been doing amazing work on our (VA gun owners) behalf for many years.
http://www.vcdl.org/
God bless!