The 2nd Amendment & the Myth of Gun Control (Part 1 of 2)
By TLB Contributing Author: Rico S. Giron
So exactly what is gun control? I suppose it depends from what perspective you look at the issue. First, the perspective of “the right to keep and bear arms” for the individual man or woman. Second, the perspective of the government which is always to encroach on, co-opt and usurp Natural Rights hard won by blood. Dictatorships and authoritarian Governments hate people with “God given Natural Rights”, but love people with privileges given to them by the government. The U.S. “government” loves to confound and confuse the sheeple by telling them that God given Natural Rights are in fact privileges granted to them by the “government” and that “government” granted privileges are in fact rights. Just part if the Bizarro Opposite world we have been indoctrinated into, my friend. This is a prime example of dialectical materialism. Thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis. Furthermore, this maximizes the effect of the Saul Alinsky Principles for Radicals, see my chapter titled, Saul Alinsky Principle for Radicals, and the 5 Cs, confusion, complexity, cognitive dissonance, contradictions and Chaos. “This is a canard, a pact with the devil, a one-way trip into slavery that is as old as the idea of having a government.” Andrew Napolitano, A Nation of Sheep. Mr. Napolitano is a judge with vast experience in Constitutional issues of national importance, author and speaker of international renown.
“A hidden Constitutional problem for Americans under emergency powers is that all Constitutional Rights become “privileges” that, by necessity and International law, can be given or taken away at whim.” Fruits from a Poisonous Tree, Melvin Stamper. “Privileges, being removable at the whim of the Commander-in-Chiefs, tells us why Congress feels so free to modify Constitutional Rights such as those in the Second Amendment, i.e., gun ownership, etc.” Stamper, Supra. No matter the amount of posturing or legislating engaged in by Congress or the POTUS, Natural Rights cannot ever be given up or legislated away. “Let no man tear asunder that which God hath granted.” Natural Law Rights are not given to men by other men, and thus are not subject to Legislation no matter how high falutin and high sounding the legislation. The standard mantra from professional politicians is “this is for your own good.” “The dictatorship by and for the very wealthy, pretending to be the servant of the masses.” Antony Sutton, The Best enemy money can buy. So just be a good sheeple and grab your ankles.
Here is the grandest of Illusions in the United States. Every man, woman and child that has applied for United States Citizenship also comes under the “prized status”, Law of War, see United States v. Mattheson, 1976. “Prized” means captured by a belligerent under the Law of War and thus reduced to the status of Slave. A slave has the status of “civiliter mortuss”, that is, civilly dead to the Law of the Land. The facade is the Bill of Rights, the reality is the “prized status” with mere privileges. The intention of the Bill of Rights was to guarantee that the government would not interfere with individual God-given Natural Rights. The American sheeple have been conned into believing thru legerdemain that they have voluntarily given up their God given, Natural Rights for “government” protection from the Boogey man. A Nation of Sheeple nicely penned up and corraled by the Virtual Boogey man. Baaa! Baaa!
Government power will always be at the opposite end of the individual rights of any population in any given country. Regardless of what these governments call themselves, “republics, democracies or what-ever-the-phuck.” All governments seek to maintain their hegemony. Power is everything. Everything else is secondary. “The attempts to rob us of our freedom either totally or in part takes endless forms. Governments, for instance, find it to their advantage to chip away at our liberty to make their task of ruling us easier by prescribing and proscribing the minutest aspects of our life and actions.” News With Views.com No government will have a rational, intelligent and productive discussion about any issue. The government is interested in tapping into the “emotionalism” and “imbecile infantilism” [Albert Nock, Our Enemy, The State] of 90% of the sheeple. “How did I feel? I felt then (as I do now) that these “prominent” men are really immature juveniles at heart. The horrible reality is that these little boys have been dominant in their influence in world affairs. No wonder we have wars and violence. Skull and Bones is the symbol of terrorist violence, pirates, the SS Deaths Head Division in WW Two, labels on poison bottles and so on.” Antony Sutton, The Best enemy money can buy. “To give you an idea on just how powerful they are, they (the Progressives that control almost all of your sources of information) took a non-issue of illegal alien children being separated from their parents at the border as one of the greatest emotional injustices of all times, even though the practice had been going on under previous administrations. Through their incessant broadcasting of doctored images and imaginary torture of these poor little “innocent” children, they were able to whip a huge segment of the population into a feeding frenzy to the point of losing all semblance of common sense or rational thought.” Ron Ewart, News with Views.
“I have written this book to generate a debate about freedom; a debate regrettably, that the government does not want us to have.” Napolitano, supra. Fear is always the best weapon to manipulate, coerce and dominate the sheeple. “The federal government in general, and the president of the United States in particular, is using fear as a means to strip the American people [sheeple] of their rights.” Napolitano, supra. We have the most deceptive War in human history. The Eternal “War on Terror.” It is a virtual “War” and is un-winnable, but it sure generates a lot of profit and Fear. In addition to Fear, Political Correctness is now in vogue as a primary control mechanism. Commerce is War, War is Commerce. “War, what is it good for? With the same “socialist” elites backing both sides, it’s good for business. It’s good for creating chaos and destruction. It’s good for launching new global organizations, in the aftermath; organizations that exert a level of control and reach that didn’t exist before. It’s good for launching organizations like the United Nations and the European Union and the World Trade Organization—dedicated to Globalism, which in turn is dedicated to planned civilization, in which the individual is demeaned and the group is All.” Jon Rappaport.
Governments love sheeple and hate true men of principle willing to die for those Principles. “I’d rather die fighting for freedom than to live as a slave.” Andrew Napolitano, supra. Perhaps the better questions would be, “How and why” has “our government” become pathological and dysfunctional? Power (structures) will always do two things. It will gather more power unto itself and it will always protect the power structures it creates. Power does not share. Power seeks power for the sake of power itself. “You will soon discover the federal government’s sinister history of twisting our ‘rights, and dignity and matchless value’ to serve its own ends. To appropriate more and more power to itself.” Napolitano, supra. William Buckley, syndicated columnist stated, “Power, that is the Great Aphrodisiac.” Power is the great Addiction for Humans. Dictators would rather die before giving up Power. Once Power is usurped by tyrants or corrupt “government”, it will not be returned voluntarily. The usurper will need an ass kicking. This is where revolutions are born, thru ultimate, intolerable injustices and violences against the population.
“Sadly in the administration of virtually every American president, from George Washington to George Bush [and on into 2018 with Trump] the government that was formed to protect these basic rights has rejected the significance of our humanity in enforcing the laws, in legislating and in conducting trials.” Napolitano, supra. Welcome to the Virtual, U.S. Dictatorship, where TRUTH AND GOD are not welcome. [President Ronald Reagan said: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”] newswithviews.com
Melvin Stamper, JD, supra, wrote, “For all intents and purposes, the Constitution is an illusion, kept by the government only as a pacifier [see my chapter titled ‘The Pacification of the American sheeple‘] for we the people, nothing more…In other words, the Constitution is optional to the Federal government, because after all, you answer to the “Juristic Personality” name, spelled in all capital letters, placing you in Equity jurisdiction without the protection of the Constitution.” “In a society where the state and the media have merged, authoritarianism can and will be established, even though in appearance [American is the land of Image, Image is Everything] the citizenry enjoys so-called democratic freedoms.” “A Government of Wolves”, John Whitehead. Welcome to Hollywood La La Land, aka, Amerika!!! FYI, Stamper and Whitehead are constitutional attorneys.
Now on to the Open, Notorious, Hostile Occupation. How can an ONHO be made palatable or invisible to the conquered peoples? Again, you create positions of authority and elevate them above the average American sheeple. The po-, po-, police! And give them a gun and a badge to top it off. Special uniforms, typically black or dark blue to signify Saturn, the God of War. Now we are getting somewhere. Send them to special schools called “police academies and basic training.” And the cherry on top, have them take an oath of loyalty to the federal corporation called the United States, which is a private municipal corporation chartered in 1871 under the aegis of il Vaticano.
In olden times, the police were called “peace officers”. Now that this country is fully militarized, we call them, “law enforcement officers”, which begs the questions, “what law are they enforcing.” I think it is clear that they are enforcing Martial Law under the direction of the Commander in Chief. Keep in mind that Martial Law is also known as International Maritime/Admiralty Law of War on the Open Ocean. Here is the end result, every officer that has taken an Oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, has taken a false oath to defend the corporation called the United States, not the American way of Life. “’United States‘ is a Federal corporation, says U.S. Code, Title 28. (C) an instrumentality of the United States. The congress of the U.S.ofA created a corporation and gave it the name ‘United States‘ to fool everyone, as far as I am concerned.” ‘United States’ is a Federal corporation, says U.S. Code, Title 28. Not to belabor the point, but in the organic and original Constitution it stated, “Do hereby ordain and establish this Constitution for the united states of America.” Did you catch the difference in wording. The original Constitution was for “America”, while the perverted and corrupted Constitution is for the Corporation called “United States.” The United States corporation, fake “government” is a false predicate, a deception. But is has worked wonders to keep the American sheeple pacified. During WWII, the German soldiers took an Oath to be loyal to Hitler himself personally. Now the Oath is to the Commander in Chief, whoever it may be at the time. Generic but effective. My oh my, when will the American Sheeple wake the phuck up?????
I have to start by looking at how language is used to control our consciousness and perspectives of reality on any given subject. For instance, is “gun control”, a separate and distinct issue from “gun confiscation” or from “gun registration” or gun licensing? So what then are the distinct definitions of the following words, “arms, guns, handguns, weapons, firearms, pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns, and so forth.” We must start from the perspective of inquisitiveness, ask questions and so forth. We have to ask the basic questions of a detective: Who, What, Where, When, How and Why.
“Words are singularly the most powerful force available to humanity. We can choose to use this force constructively with words of encouragement, or destructively using words of despair. Words have energy and power with the ability to help, to heal, to hinder, to hurt, to humiliate and to humble.” Yehuda Berg. I would add that words have the power to destroy and kill.
In the context of the 2nd amendment, it was clearly understood by the authors, that “arms” meant weapons of self defense and weapons of war. The term “arms” was and is all inclusive. At that particular historical time frame there was no need to differentiate, as arms, [weapons] were of the musket and pistol nature. It would be easy to include knives, axes, spear or even clubs as weapons of war and self defense. It is the inventiveness of the American mind and Commerce that have produced the vast array of weapons for killing other human beings. If there is money to be made, Commerce will drive the inventiveness to infinity. Colt, Smith and Wesson, Winchester, Ruger, Sharps are all weapons manufacturers and have made billions of Federal Reserve Notes off of the death of humans. Sad but true, Commerce is War, War is Commerce.
I will start with “gun control” and attempt to address the “whats and whys” of gun control. From the point of view as an individual gun owner, gun control means knowing my weapon, how to hold the gun, how to posture myself, how to breath, and so forth. But primarily, “gun control” means using both hands and making sure I hit my target. That answers the “what”. Who then is responsible for individual gun control? Well, who else, I am and you are. This includes knowing how to strip, clean and lube my guns. If there are children in the house or area, you and I are responsible for the safety of these children. I taught my son how to shoot and handle rifles and revolvers when he was six years old. And guess what, he has never had an accident with any kind of weapon. He can strip and clean his S & W pistol and AR-15.
The issue of “gun control” from the point of the “government” is a myth, there is no such thing. Whenever the U.S. “government” enacts laws and statutes, it must define the words used. In the case of the “government”, it does not use words, but rather uses “terms.” As you will see and I will prove, “terms” are fictions that mean whatsoever the “government” chooses those terms to mean. The purpose of defining [words] terms, is to protect themselves from liability and to further enslave the sheeple to the Matrix. Legal scholars understand that in Law, words mean what they say, and say what they mean. However, the caveat is that we are dealing with “terms.” Here is the entrance to the La La Land of Legal-sleaze aka, the Principle of the Four Ls. The language used by the U.S. “government” is legal-sleaze, doublespeak and gooble-de-gook. It is never meant to communicate but rather to deceive and misinform. I proposed the White House Principle earlier in my writings, namely, “Every thing the White House says or does is a lie. You must take everything said and done by the White House and reverse it 180 degrees in the opposite direction and then flip it upside down. That will bring you much closer to the truth.”
Or we could simply say, “Welcome to Alice in Wonderland”, aka, Washington, District for the Criminally Insane. I believe that one of the characters states, “Words mean exactly what I say they mean, no more and no less.” This is a favorite childhood fairy tale that every child in America, or should I just say, the U.S. Indoctrination Camp, is exposed to repeatedly over their years in “school.” Then the grandest of Deceptions, Satan Claus, the grossly fat, alcoholic, slave master God of Commerce. This is just part of the nationwide indoctrination programming that has been going on for decades. We start our own children on this path of indoctrination as early as possible. Free thinking is not welcome in the Indoctrination Camp. “Thru Social Programming the child from an early age is entrained to become a good worker and consumer, our education system dumbs down natural-born creative inner genius (divergent thinking) from 98% in children to less than 2% by adulthood, a study has proven. Only a handful of notable individuals have scaled Maslow’s Hierarchy of Self-Actualization to free themselves of the confinement of culture and conditioning to live out a life of creative genius each one of us is gifted at birth.” Maslow. We kill divergent thinking and genius as fast as possible thru the dumbing down process of the public school indoctrination. We take our children and adulterate them into adults, good workers and cogs in the machine. When we are confronted with liaryers or police officers, they function under that very principle. Words mean exactly what they say they mean, no more and no less at the point of a gun. Just argue with a police officer, a sheriff or his deputies, or a stater, and off to jail mother-phucker.
Before I go further into this volatile issue, I must address the definition of the following words; “arms, guns, handguns, weapons, firearms, pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns, and so forth.” Since firearms are under the control of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, aka, BATF, for short, we will go straight to the horse’s mouth, so to speak. Title 27 of the USC; and 27, Code of Federal Regulations are where the BATF functions and gets its authority from. Of course, the Net is the best source for rules and regulations. The Code of Federal Regulations is what gives teeth to the 50 USC.
Here then is the essential question. If a [word] term is not included in the statutory definition provided by the “government”, is that particular item included in the statutory definition by default? Perhaps the answer is obvious to most, maybe not. Law must be exact and precise to have teeth. Numerous court decisions have stated that “laws that are unclear are void for ambiguity.” When both liaryers and the general population must guess at the meaning of laws, then it creates the Five Cs, confusion, complexity, cognitive dissonance, contradictions and Chaos. By using “terms” rather than words, this is exactly the desired outcome. Why hell, even a murderer can get off on a “technicality” because a term in a statute is unclear. That is providing you can afford a hotshot liaryer from one of the Ivy League schools.
There is a Maxim of Law that clearly states, [“Inclusion of one is exclusion of the other.”] By the well known rules of statutory interpretation an inclusion of certain named things as an exception to general provisions excludes all un-named things.”] The American Lawyer and People v. Craig. Let us examine and apply this Maxim of Law in relation to the definition of “Firearms” by the BATF.
At 27 CFR we find 479.11-Meaning of terms. I want to direct your attention to something here that can easily bypass your consciousness. It states, “Meaning of terms”, not words. English is not spoken in government circles. Only “legal-sleaze, doublespeak and gooble-de-gook” please. The word “term” has 16 different meanings. The first two meanings are indicative of the legalese meanings. 1.a word or group of words serving as the specific name of something, especially in a special field. What is the special field? Legal-sleaze of course. Boy, that is a doubleplusgood special.
2. any word or group of words considered as a member of a construction or utterance. This is pretty interesting, “a member of a construction.” What in the world is “a construction?” I know I constructed my own house over twenty years. Black’s law dictionary is enlightening here. “As applied to statutes, constitutions, contracts, etc. the term necessarily presupposes doubt, obscurity or ambiguity.” In other words, “ a construction” is a lie, a fraud, a deception. Remember this from above, “Numerous court decisions have stated that “laws that are unclear are void for ambiguity.” “In CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, statutes that contain ambiguous language are VOID FOR VAGUENESS. The language of such laws is considered so obscure and uncertain that a reasonable person cannot determine from a reading what the law purports to command or prohibit.” Ambiguity. Ok then. On to utterance. To “utter” means to offer a forged instrument with the representation by words or actions, that the same is genuine. Again, a lie, a fraud and a deception. This next paragraph is a pish-posh of deception, lies, assumptions and presumptions. To be blunt, constructions or utterances are simply mind phucks. So let’s have some fun and tear this section a new asshole.
When used in this part and in forms prescribed under this part, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof, terms shall have the meanings ascribed in this section. Words in the plural form shall include the singular, and vice versa, and words importing the masculine gender shall include the feminine. The terms “includes” and “including” do not exclude other things not enumerated which are in the same general class or are otherwise within the scope thereof. This contradicts the maxim of Law that states, “Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius Definition: … “… a maxim of interpretation meaning that the expression of one thing is the exclusion of the other. When certain persons or things are specified in a law, contract or will, an intention to exclude all others from its operation may be inferred.” Again, a mind phuck!!
Any other weapon. [Any weapon or device] capable of being concealed on the person from which a shot can be discharged through the energy of an explosive, a pistol or revolver having a barrel with a smooth bore designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell, weapons with combination shotgun and rifle barrels 12 inches or more, less than 18 inches in length, from which only a single discharge can be made from either barrel without manual reloading, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire. Such term shall not include a pistol or a revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores, or weapons designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder and not capable of firing fixed ammunition. This last part addresses, “dummy weapons”, you know weapons that we are not smart enough to qualify to fire any live rounds.
This paragraph is a prime example of the deceptions and lies used in government statutes/manuals. This paragraph is not using English but rather Legal-sleaze, doublespeak and gooble-de-gook. It is defining “terms”, not words of the English language. It starts, “Any other weapon”, and then proceeds to attempt to define “any other weapon” by using the word “weapon” in the definition and throws in another term that remains undefined, “device.” Even a child knows that you cannot use the same word in defining another word. Somehow this eluded the liaryers with the infamous J.D.s writing these statutes. Section 479.11 does not provide the definition of the term “device.” This is the same as if I attempt to define “dog” by saying “a dog is a dog, or a cat.” Then to further confuse the situation, I define “dog” as an animal with three legs and no hair. And still, I fail to define cat. To add insult to injury, I state that if an animal has four legs and hair, it can never be a dog. Do you see any absurdities in this pathetic attempt? Additionally, this paragraph fails to define the term “weapon”, in fact, in this entire section 479.11, the BATF fails to define the term “weapon.” From a statutory and “legal” point of interpretation, “any other weapon” is a different term than “weapon.” This is precisely the type of obfuscation used in legalese. Statutes like these deliberately create gigantic holes in logic and the liaryers that wrote these statutes knew that everyone person reading these statutes will fill in the holes to suit their own personal biases. Either that, or they were stoned out of their minds.
I will re-direct your attention to the material above: 2. any word or group of words considered as a member of a construction or utterance. This is pretty interesting, “a member of a construction.” What in the world is “a construction?” Black’s law dictionary is enlightening here. “As applied to statutes, constitutions, contracts, etc. the term necessarily presupposes doubt, obscurity or ambiguity.” In other words, “ a construction” is a lie, a fraud, a deception. I sure hope this connects some dots for you. This entire section is meant to create the Five Cs, confusion, complexity, cognitive dissonance, contradictions and Chaos. To restate, a construction or an utterance, are mind phucks.
In this same paragraph, the absurdities continue. Let’s dissect this sentence further,“a pistol or revolver having a barrel with a smooth bore designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell.” This information is enlightening. In order to be included in this definition of terms, “any other weapon”, the pistol or revolver must have two things, 1. a smooth bore, 2. be designed or re-designed to fire a shotgun shell. I can say unequivocally that all modern pistols and revolvers have a rifled barrel(s). So then, pistols and revolvers with rifled barrels are not included in the definition of “any other weapon.”
Of course it gets better. This next line is totally awesome: Such term shall not include a pistol or a revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores. So finally, some clarification. The term “any other weapon” does not include modern pistols with rifled bores. In this case, the exclusion is specifically and clearly spelled out. This particular liaryer that wrote those lines must have been stoned out of his mind and had a moment of “clarity.” So the term, “Any other weapon” does not include a pistol or revolver with rifled bores. So how many men and women have been charged and are currently imprisoned for carrying a pistol or revolver with rifled bores under the presumption or construction/utterance that this pistol or revolver was a “firearm”? When a “government” debauches and perverts language to charge, arrest and imprison it’s own population solely for profit, that given “government” looses all legitimacy to rule by the consent of the governed. Welcome to Incarceration Nation. “Consent of the governed” is a phrase from the United States Declaration of Independence. It is synonymous with a political theory wherein a government’s legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when derived from the people or society over which that political power is exercised. This theory of “consent” is historically contrasted to the divine right of kings and has often been invoked against the legitimacy of colonialism. Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government” Definitions for consent of the governed.
For some bizarre and misguided reason I will give the BATF the benefit of the doubt. Surely this must some sort of typo. How about the following definition of terms. This following paragraph is very enlightening. We must overlay the Maxim of Law, “Inclusion of one is exclusion of the other.” Sections a-h are the inclusions and therefore, all other words or terms not named are exclusions.
(a) shotgun with barrel(s) less than 18 inches
(b) a weapon made from a shotgun less than 26 inches overall length
(c)a rifle with barrel(s) shorter than 16 inches or overall length of less than 26 inches
(e) “any other weapon” from the above paragraph which specifically excludes “pistols and revolvers with rifled barrels.
You can read the rest on your own. You get the gist.
(a) A shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (b) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (c) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (d) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (e) any other weapon, as defined in this subpart; (f) a machine gun; (g) a muffler or a silencer for any firearm whether or not such firearm is included within this definition; and (h) a destructive device. The term shall not include an antique firearm or any device (other than a machine gun or destructive device) which, although designed as a weapon, the Director finds by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector’s item and is not likely to be used as a weapon. For purposes of this definition, the length of the barrel having an integral chamber(s) on a shotgun or rifle shall be determined by measuring the distance between the muzzle and the face of the bolt, breech, or breech block when closed and when the shotgun or rifle is cocked. The overall length of a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle is the distance between the extreme ends of the weapon measured along a line parallel to the center line of the bore. There you have it, directly from the horse’s mouth.
Maybe I am just flat out getting old, but I failed to find the definition of the term “pistol” or “revolver” within the definition of “Firearm” above. Paragraph (e) refers back to “any other weapon”, which excludes “pistols and revolvers with a rifled barrel(s). So then, by the very definition of the term “firearm” by the BATF itself, in the Code of Federal Regulations, pistols and revolvers with rifled bores are not considered “firearms.” Additionally, there is no mention of rifles or shotguns with barrels longer than 18 inches or overall length of longer than 26 inches as being “firearms.” By the very definition of the BATF, any shotgun or rifle with a barrel(s) longer than 18 inches or overall length of more than 26 inches or rifled barrels, is not considered a “firearm.” These are specific exclusions. By applying the inclusion/exclusion Maxim of Law, this paragraph comes into sharp focus.
Additionally, this paragraph above excludes and does not define “guns, arms, handguns, weapons” deliberately. This exclusion then creates the conundrum of “what is arms/gun/handgun/weapons confiscation?” So how can the militarized police/military soldiers engage in gun confiscation? Under the Law of War, wherein the civilians are the “enemy of the state.” Remember the Mao Principle? Any and all fictions can be converted into a reality at the end of a gun barrel. Paragraph “Firearm” above does not provide the definition of arms, guns, handguns or weapons.
End of Part I
The 2nd Amendment and the Myth of Gun Control
Prelude to Part II
Due to the massive indoctrination we receive in our so called “public education schools”, which in essence are more like indoctrination camps and day care centers, most of us, myself included, have a second grade education grade reading level. So I will make an attempt to read the paragraph above, “Firearms” from a higher level of understanding. The BATF itself is telling us that a “Firearm” is in essence an illegal item of contraband. I know for a fact that a shotgun with a barrel(s) shorter than 18 inches is illegal and can land you in prison for 10 years and a $250,000.00 fine.
The American sheeple have been bamboozled, again, by the manipulation of language into believing and agreeing that they are requesting permission from the BATF and the FBI to purchase a “Firearm”, by which the very definitions state that a “firearm” is illegal contraband. The Firearms described in Sections a-e in the above paragraph are illegal to own or possess. Section F describes a machine gun, which is also illegal to own, except by special permission and fees, follow the money. Section G, describes a silencer, which is also illegal to own, except by special permission and fees, follow the money. By the BATF’s own definition, I have never purchased a “firearm” nor do I own or use any “Firearms.”
Here is the most revealing question we can ask ourselves. When we apply to the BATF thru its Gun Czar, the FBI, are we applying to purchase any of the ‘firearms’ described in the “Firearms” paragraph? Are you buying a sawed off shotgun with barrels shorter than 18 inches or a sawed off rifle with barrels shorter than 16 and both of these with an overall length shorter than 26 inches? I did not think so neither. Are you applying to buy a machine gun or a destructive device? Are you buying a pistol or revolver with a rifled bore or smooth bore?
Notice from the Author
Any and all copyright restrictions are hereby lifted by the original author. This article (all 3 parts) may be copied, cited, and reproduced in part or in whole with no restrictions on copyright. Rico S. Giron
About the Author, Rico S. Giron: I have been writing and journaling non-professionally for 43 years. My adventures into personal literature began when I was 18 years old. My life has been an exploration and adventure in consciousness and philosophical meanderings …
To find out more please visit:
Or Visit Rico on facebook
Read more great articles by Rico
Stay tuned to …
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.