A Red Flag Law Enforcement Ban?

By Blank_US_Map.svg: User:TheshibbolethBlank_US_Map.svg, CC BY-SA 4.0, Link

This is TTAG’s weekly roundup of legal and legislative news affecting guns, the gun business and gun owners’ rights. For a deeper dive into the topics discussed here, check out this week in gun rights at FPC

Kansas legislature introduced bills to keep officials from assisting the federal Government from enforcing “red flag laws”

The “Kansas Anti-Red-Flag Act” would prohibit any private citizen or official from aiding federal authorities in enforcing any federal red flag law. Kansas lawmakers have pre-filed bills in both the state house and senate. The laws are aggressive preemption provisions respecting “extreme risk protection orders,” or as we commonly dub them, “red flag laws.”

We’ve written extensively about red flag laws and their awful consequences, and it seems every other week there’s still another one to cover. These awful policies flip due process on its head, harm innocent people, and frustrate an already tenuous relationship between law enforcement and the communities they police. Suffice to say, I’m massively sensitive to the objectives of the Kansas Anti-Red-Flag Act. That’s why I wish I could say I felt like the Act was more than a signaling device.

To be clear, I’m broadly supportive of the concept of sanctuary provisions, of which this Act is a species. Some even, quite melodramatically, called it an Act to “make Kansas a sanctuary state for danger.” That said, we should demand sanctuary provisions that actually work. In so far as the Kansas Act would render federal law “null, void, unenforceable and of no effect in the state of Kansas,” it just gives an excuse to overturn the entire Act under the supremacy clause.

There are ways to write sanctuary laws that work. A lot of those mechanisms are present in the Kansas Act. Things like penalties for state officials who enforce or give aid to feds can work. A blanket statement, and criminal penalties for federal agents enforcing federal law just guarantees the law will be struck down. Of course, this is a powerful statement. It might even be a statement worth making, but it should be made in a separate act. If Kansas wants to show solidarity with its people, it should meaningfully bind its own hands from enforcing red flag laws before taking jabs at the feds via the supremacy clause.

Open Source Defense releases analysis of Virginia gun control draft

VCDL Virginia

Image courtesy VCDL

Open Source Defense, a refreshingly optimistic organization working to make people proud to be associated with gun rights, released an analysis of Virginia’s looming gun control package. It’s thorough and takes into account often ignored factors like race, compliance, and more.

It’s definitely worth a look if you want a deep dive of the Virginia situation, although we still have no idea what the ultimate bill package will look like, if it comes at all.

Poll: 36% of Dem primary voters favor confiscation of firearms

national gun control confiscation

(AP Photo/Lynne Sladky)

Polls are always of dubious utility. Small sample sizes, biases, and more crap up the signal-to-noise ratio. Still, people rely on polls as if they’re a known and proven acid test. I view polls more as something to glean inferences from, which helps keep my blood pressure at moderately elevated rather than dangerous levels. All that said, a new poll from Zogby Analytics ran recently, polling 443 likely Democrat primary voters, and of those, 36% supported confiscating legally owned firearms from Americans.

Of course, an online poll of 443 is as scientific as a dowsing rod, but still, 36% gives us something to think about. Many might balk at that number, but to me it shows that we might be winning. In 1959, gallup indicated that 60% of Americans favored banning possession of all handguns. Now, this poll shows us that of Americans with a predisposition to disfavor gun ownership, only 36% polled supported the ban. 

While it’s not the 0% I’d like it to be, I’m happy to take progress wherever I can see it. Keep talking to your friends, family, and neighbors about gun ownership. Keep normalizing it to more people, while being approachable and friendly. That’s how we’ll drive these numbers down to where they belong.

Rules, schmules, says the government in challenge to “prohibited person” status

We can often feel like government ignores its own rules. This is because it usually does. One such instance was the quite chaotic approach taken by the government in United States v. Hunt-Irving, a challenge to federal law preventing all felons, even non-violent ones, from owning a gun.

After being supplied more than a 100 day extension to file their brief, the government requested two more last-minute deadline extensions before ultimately filing a brief at the last moment, which was a chunky 5,000 words over the limit. A bold strategy.

 

Matthew Larosiere is the Director of Legal Policy at the Firearms Policy Coalition.

comments

  1. avatar Dennis says:

    They wont enforce immigration law, but they’ll go to SCOTUS to enforce an infringement on your bill of rights! Should tell everyone all they need to know.

    1. avatar BootsOnGround says:

      This is pure and raw socialism where citizens rights are taken away in order for the governments to control and manipulate Americans. It is taking place under the disguise of the issue of saving or not saving lives. It is purely about controlling Americans by forcing them to give up their firearms by making laws that are unconstitutional and illegal.

      1. avatar M1Lou says:

        Look at Virginia for their mindset. They think about rights as being granted by the government, and can be taken or given on a whim. There is almost no talk about the constitution on their part. They just want to pass the law and force compliance. Any court battles don’t bother them as long as it is on the books. The Virginia and U.S. Constitution do not factor in their decision making on passage of laws.

  2. avatar Wedge259 says:

    This is the first I’ve heard of that anti red flag bill as a Kansan, but I’m glad to hear of it! I think Kansas is widely overlooked as probably in the top 5 for most gun friendly States in the nation. I will look into it more and see what the details are.

    1. avatar possum, and the "Coons of Doom" says:

      We
      was a little worried when someone from New York and a Democrat at that got elected govonor. Looking good so far.

      1. avatar M1Lou says:

        Out of staters destroyed my home state of Oregon. I hated watching people that had only lived in Oregon for a few years running for election and winning, bringing their idiotic ideas with them. Especially since my family came to the state during the Oregon trail.

        I lived in eastern Kansas for a year and loved it. Visiting Lawrence felt like I was back in Eugene though. Hopefully Kansas can keep the stupid people out, but it seems to be spreading to all states as the lefty run states become sinking ships.

        1. avatar David says:

          Liberals seem to gather in larger cities. Together they have collective power and make it appear that they have more power and influence.

  3. The ONLY ‘law’ that matters is the Supreme Law of the Land. And included in that Supreme Law we find:

    “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    Any ‘law’ in any town, city, state or the nation as a whole that is in contravention of that Supreme Law is null and void from the very second it was enacted. And that is Constitutional TRUTH despite whatever any treasonous court opines to the contrary.

    1. avatar Tired of the bs says:

      This 1000%

    2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      And any politician, judge, law enforcement person that proposes- backs or enforces an unconstitutional law should be quickly removed from office and prosecuted for breaking their sworn oath and for civil rights violations.

      1. Ed Schrade – “And any politician, judge, law enforcement person that proposes- backs or enforces an unconstitutional law should be quickly removed from office and prosecuted for breaking their sworn oath and for civil rights violations.”

        Aye, and if the death of a citizen can be shown to have resulted from their unconstitutional actions, then they should face the death penalty.

  4. avatar MLee says:

    A “poll” is about as worthless as anything could be to me. Why on earth would I CARE, what others are thinking.
    I am capable of forming my own conclusion and opinions without consulting or considering a poll, which are total garbage in the first place and wholly meaningless. Consider what type of person would even consent to a poll in the first place!! I have been called up and asked to take a poll in the past and I can tell you they are a galactic time consuming JOKE with leading questions that don’t allow you to express your own true opinion. Now when they call, I hang up on them. I have zero inclination to waste my time with that garbage. Anyone who takes a poll is having their opinions manipulated by questions that mean absolutely NOTHING.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Because if they’re plotting to harm you and are willing to tell other people it’s a great way to find out who’s out to get you. Now you can start working to prevent their plans from coming to fruition.

      I mean, if I was following you around with the idea in my head that stabbing the shit out you was on today’s menu, would you want to know that a bit in advance or would you prefer the surprise?

    2. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

      Polls are funny. If they put in a double negative it can confuse people. “Are you against the repeal of the anti-thing that was wasn’t against the repeal of the pro-thing?”

  5. avatar strych9 says:

    “In 1959, gallup indicated that 60% of Americans favored banning possession of all handguns.”

    An example I’ve used before (though not the exact same year in this case) of why the whole generational warfare thing is even dumber than Fundies or the Snuggie.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      in 1959…in many places..not a lot of people owned handguns…and if you did…and it was not a war trophy…it frequently caused a raised eyebrow…that has all changed, of course and now it is quite common……you also have to acknowledge that there were few, if any restrictions on gun ownership at that time and people seemed content with that…

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        “…and people seemed content with that…”

        No. From 1900 to about 1995 gun control was quite popular. Like 60%+ approval type popular. 78% approval for “stricter gun laws” in 1991 was about on par with the public opinion in the mid 1930’s.

        Compared to previous time periods, 50+ years ago, self-admitted gun ownership is down but approval for gun control is too. It’s just that approval for gun control has come back up a bit in recent years.

        The sad fact here is this: from 1900 to 2019 you’ve got about a total of six years where gun control polls under 50%. Mostly from 2008 to 2012.

        That’s why Democrats have been so confused as to why it’s been a loser for them for over half a century.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Because “most” people surveyed about gun ownership will, by nature, LIE. What moron would tell the truth to a “pollster”about their gun ownership, income, where they store their valuables, etc? True now or in 1960.

  6. avatar Ralph says:

    States are sovereign. While state officials cannot interfere with the Feds, state officials cannot be compelled to enforce Federal laws. In that case, the Feds would be on their own.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      True enough, but on their own for what? There are no federal red flag laws. Nor is there any particularly compelling reason for any such laws. This is an area of state interest, not federal. The feds have plenty of laws to deal with domestic terrorists, and I would think that they really do not want to get in the business of regulating domestic relationships when there is an ample number of state laws on the books to deal with those situations.

    2. avatar strych9 says:

      They might not be compelled under legal penalty but they sure as hell can be compelled through “the budget process” administered by the various alphabet soup agencies.

      For example your state’s speed limit is to high for the feds? No highway funding. Set a “reasonable” but don’t enforce it to the Fed’s liking? No highway funding. Do what you’re told or the spigot of your state’s own money never gets turned back on.

      The 16A wasn’t a great idea.

      1. avatar Ing says:

        Hands down, the 16th Amendment was the worst thing ever to happen to this nation. The Founders’ entire plan pretty much died the second it was ratified.

      2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        Without a Federal Income tax the Nation would collapse overnight. Poor states would go immediately bankrupt and the Military would cease to exist (which I admit would be the best thing that could ever happen here).

        1. avatar Cloud says:

          You’re a fuckin psychopath.

        2. avatar neiowa says:

          An idiot.

    3. avatar Sheena says:

      WRONG. States are not sovereign over the Federal Constitution. Gun ownership being one of them. That goes for immigration too.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        So you’re a big fan of the 14A incorporation doctrine then?

        1. strych9 – “So you’re a big fan of the 14A incorporation doctrine then?”

          There is no such thing as the “incorporation doctrine”. As amendments become part and parcel of the original Constitution when ratified:

          U.S. Constitution, Article V

          The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

          Plainly, the ‘incorporation doctrine’ is nothing more than an utterly worthless BS scam perpetrated on We The People by the treasonous courts.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          ‘There is no such thing as the “incorporation doctrine”.’

          The states disagreed and often still do. That’s why the courts apply the “incorporation doctrine”, specifically to say “This right over here, found in Amendment Y, is also incorporated by the 14A, so stop arguing that it doesn’t apply to the states”.

      2. avatar Ralph says:

        “States are not sovereign over the Federal Constitution. ”

        Learn to read. I said that states are sovereign (a proposition that predates the Constitution), state officials cannot interfere with the Feds, and state officials cannot be compelled to enforce Federal laws.

        See Printz v. U.S. and Mack v. U.S. where SCOTUS struck down the requirement that local police check the backgrounds of prospective gun buyers under the Brady Act.

        Or better still, have someone read it to you.

  7. avatar Prndll says:

    Is that the same 36% that’s completely out of touch with reality?

    1. avatar bryan1980 says:

      And the same one that doesn’t realize it’s not up to them (nor anyone else) to decide whether we can own firearms or not.

  8. avatar Truckman says:

    the red flag laws that I know of are state laws just like the one that the people of Virginia people are trying to fight and also all-state Governments control the status of state prisoners and when they can get their rights back the feds. only the ones tried in federal courts. Heck the feds and local cops don’t enforce current gun laws so how are they going to handle any new ones one big one is that when a felon tries to buy a gun a dealer and is turned down somebody is supposed to check them out to find out why they are trying to buy a gun when they are breaking the law just trying

    1. avatar Ing says:

      The Democunts want a federal one and there are quite a few Republicons on board with them. It’ll come up for a vote at some point.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      normal these days for an FFL ro have appeals forms available for those that are rejected…indicative that it is quite common…

  9. avatar Tuck Frump says:

    Thanks again Donny Bonespurs!

  10. avatar possum, and the "Coons of Doom" says:

    I’m still bitching about the Domestic violence a misdeamnor ,prohiibitting someone from owning a gunm for life. Now in Kansas the cops don’t come and take your gunms( didn’t happen to me anyway) but the feds sure ain’t going to let you buy one. My main bitch about DV and no gunms for life is because not all DV charges are true, as it has happened to me and probably many others., what better way to get back at the beloved spouse then having them thrown in jail and one of their hobbies/ rights taken away. This DV misdeamnor no gunms for life needs some changing. Oh btw she didn’t show up for court so I got off that bunch of horseshit. The DV no gunms for life was one of that smiling asshole Bill Clinton gunm grabs, he’s gone and that law needs changed

    1. avatar Tired of the bs says:

      True that. If you’re going to pay felony penalties then it needs to be felony conviction

      1. avatar possum, and the "Coons of Doom" says:

        If it was a felony in ten years you could have your gunm rights restored, well with enough money and a good lawyer , and enough more money you can. DV misdeamnor = No Gunms For Life. ain’t fair

    2. avatar Red in CO says:

      The fact that misdemeanor “domestic violence” even exists is itself a massively f’d up deal. I’m not aware of any actual misdemeanor that covers physically attacking someone, those are all felonies. And the phrase “domestic violence” conjures an image of some drunk loser beating the shit out of his lady which is very much covered by charges for assault, a mid level felony in most states.

      So with misdemeanor domestic violence, the feminists needed something that sounded really bad and carried relatively stiff penalties but that’s also somehow legally minor enough that literally ANYTHING can be counted as DV. Call your lady a nasty name? DV. She throws her phone at you during an argument? DV, for you (somehow). Get frustrated with her, walk outside and punch your own car? DV. Those are not theoretical examples either, all three have occurred to people I know

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Simple assault comes to mind.

        It’s often a misdemeanor. Usually for something like shoving someone but without causing significant injury.

        Depends heavily on the state. In Colorado it’s called Third Degree Assault and it’s a Class 1 Misdemeanor under the CRS.

      2. avatar M says:

        In many states, simple assault or battery is a misdemeanor (FL and a few others use the term “battery” for a physical attack, while an “assault” is a threat).

  11. avatar adverse6 says:

    Feds provide the money, states do the dirty work. Thanks to The National Socialist Party half of the government.

  12. avatar Gene Ralno says:

    Clearly red flag laws have triggered the national movement for 2nd Amendment Sanctuary counties. And we’re already witnessing a sea change in the sanctuary movement. I’ve always understood that these partisan and unconstitutional laws could be defeated by simply denying assistance to federal or state law enforcement.

    The obvious reason is federal and state resources alone are woefully inadequate to enforce such things as red flag or magazine violations and could not begin to undertake such efforts without local law enforcement assistance. If deputizing hundreds of thousands to actively resist federal and state efforts is representative of the whole movement, it’s a single issue rebellion which could rapidly expand.

    Hundreds of counties already have proclaimed sanctuary status and almost 70 percent of the counties nationwide might reasonably be expected to declare allegiance to the Constitution and refusal to enforce laws that violate it. That would comprise 1,700 counties that have no murders plus 472 counties with only one murder per year. If that materializes, one desirable result would force federal and state enforcement to start with the 63 counties where the vast majority of criminal activity occurs.

    This movement is understandable because the fact is, red flag laws were created to dilute power licensed to the psychiatric community. These laws transfer power to unqualified persons more obedient to democrats, e.g., local judges and crotchety old aunts. Due process requires reports from two psychiatrists, one from each side, legal representation, arraignment, indictment and trial by jury.

    Nobody wants criminals to have firearms but to be taken seriously, if the accused is a danger to himself or others, he should be legally arrested. In other words, take the man but leave the guns. The line of inheritance codified in state laws determines the legal custodian of any property. Politicians on both sides who support this notion will regret the day they ever heard of red flag laws.

    Their legacies will carry a Supreme Court scolding and perhaps be the landmark of their careers. Writers, politicians and demonstrators have been hoodwinked by Bloomberg’s rhetoric and haven’t read his 2018 data. It reveals gun homicides declined seven percent, firearm injuries declined 10 percent, fatal child shootings (under 18) declined 12 percent and unintentional shootings plummeted 21 percent.

    None of this hysteria is justified. Since 1991, the murder rate has fallen by 45 percent and the overall violent crime rate has fallen by 48 percent. It’s bizarre that Bloomberg wants to change all that. Since 1999, the statistical probability of a student being killed in school, on any given day by a gun has been one in 614 million. Your odds of winning the lottery are 1 in 300 million. The chances of your child being kidnapped are about one in 300,000. Bloomberg says the nation is in crisis, suffering an epidemic. Folks, there is no crisis, no epidemic.

    Shooting incidents involving students have been declining since the ’90s. Fact is all but three mass shooters in recent history passed background checks. Two stole their rifles. The other one bought from a guy who assembled it from parts and sold it from home. Murders committed by all types of rifles combined, in 2018, dropped by 23.9 percent. According to the FBI, out of 14,123 homicides in 2018, only 297 (2.1%) were committed by rifles.

    During that time, citizens were buying a record number of firearms. In 2018, more than 26 million requests were submitted to the National Instant Background System, a general indicator of firearms purchased. That number was exceeded only by 27.5 million in 2016 when purchasers were mortified that Hillary might be elected. Democrats want US citizens to believe making the U.S. safer for criminals will make it safer for their victims. Ask yourself, do you believe being disarmed makes you safer? What kind of political leader would disarm his people while howling about the peril they face?

    These laws have not considered all the possible areas they might harm. For example, what if a crotchety old aunt complained about a blustery nephew who also is a Federal Firearms Licensee and established dealer? What if the nephew is a licensee who operates a pawn shop? What if the nephew stores a neighbor’s firearms because his safe is large enough? What about a nephew whose firearms are stored somewhere else? And so on.

    The Supreme Court isn’t about to jeopardize its own reputation by reducing the ability of private citizens to defend themselves. It’s especially important because currently, half the nation’s murders occur in only 63 counties while the other half are spread across the other 3,081 counties. Said another way, 15 percent had one murder and 54 percent of the nation’s counties had no murders at all.

    Besides, they’re sick of our paralyzed congress creating ambiguous laws that ultimately land in the Supreme Court. They know it’s easy to blame the tools used for murder and to write acts that impede acquisition by peaceable, lawful citizens.

    They know it’s far more difficult to focus on the more complex reality of why incomprehensible murderers do what they do. If something is to be done, perhaps it should be focused on the mental defectives, criminals, terrorists and illegal aliens.

    1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      The courts hate 2A with a passion and always have. Guns are a threat to their power over the people and the Conservatives hate guns as much as the Liberals do that are on the courts. History has proven it. Your laughable Utopian bull-crap flies in the face of even recent history. In the last 2 years not one draconian gun or magazine ban has been overturned by the power mad gun hating courts. So seriously who are you trying to bullshit a bunch of grade school kids. Don’t look for the courts to save 2A as they are hell bent on destroying it. Over 100 years of anti-gun rulings prove it beyond any doubt.

      And Federal aid to States is more than enough power to get them do do their bidding because the political hacks of most States know their state would implode financially overnight without Federal aid and subsides.

      And you mentioned more mental health care. Another laughable joke. There is not a skin flint Republican born that will spend any money on Health Care and few insurance companies cover it and those that do charge such obscene prices for coverage only the filthy rich can afford it. Sorry try again you getting ridiculous and not facing political reality.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Spend a $1 billion to hire/pay for 10000 pshrinks and ALL you’ll get is 9990 new protard voters (and sell a bunch of new Teslas).

        Crazy is crazy. Drug it (unreliable) or lock it up but you can’t cure it. Through yapping to some pshrink or anything else.

    2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      “””””””””””””””””””””””””Shooting incidents involving students have been declining since the ’90s.”””””””””””””””””””””””‘

      Who are trying to bullshit a 4 th grade class. If you add up all the mass shootings in the U.S. last year they averaged one every other week. The public is in a panic over them and if you think bans and Universal Background checks will not come at the Federal Level in 2020 after a Democratic President is elected your living in La, la land. Even the Republicans know they will have to compromise on Universal Background checks when 90 per cent of their constituents want it passed as poll after poll in the last several weeks proves it beyond all doubt.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Stay on your meds.

  13. avatar Frank Vazquez says:

    The root of the problem are politicians that believe once they are elected or appointed to office they can pretty much push whatever agendas they like even if it goes against the wishes of the citizens they are supposed to serve.

    That’s the big problem today. It’s not about serving the country and the people, but what level of power and how they can profit financially from serving in a public office. And now we have to deal with the new liberal socialist who pretend to love America and promote justice while they choose to side with foreigners and degenerates rather than support the citizens and stand behind the principles that made this country the place that it is. They want to deconstruct America and instill socialist ideology and for all of us to be ashamed of who we are as if being an American somehow makes us responsible to carry the rest of the world even at the ruination of our own lives.

    1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      “””””””””””””””””””””””””””””They want to deconstruct America and instill socialist ideology and for all of us to be ashamed of who we are as if being an American somehow makes us responsible to carry the rest of the world even at the ruination of our own lives.””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

      The U.S. has wasted trillions being the policeman of the world and the chief invader for rape, pillage and profit since the end of WWII. So what else is new. Its been done under both the Republican and Democratic Administrations. After all someone had to take over for the Nazi’s after they were defeated in WWII.

    2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      It all boils down to money. Even the back stabbing stingy tight wad Republicans know its way cheaper to ban guns and melt them down for scrape metal profit than it is to spend money on mental health care or create high paying jobs.

  14. avatar Anymouse says:

    Small nit-pic: A higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is a good thing, so bad polls would lower it, not up it. Bad science/engineering analogies are as annoying as bad gun analogies. Fallacies wouldn’t “up the caliber” of a poll.

  15. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    Kansas is rated 45th in receiving aid from the Federal Government so any resistance to a future Federal Red Flag law would collapse overnight if the Feds withheld the billions they give Kansas in Federal Aid. As you can see resistance to any Federal Red Flag Laws is election year posturing and even a laughable joke.

    Transportation: Road improvements and repairs, air traffic control, Amtrak and other infrastructure investments.
    Education: K-12 education grants, school choice programs, disability and special education programs, and lunch assistance.
    Other veterans’ benefits.
    Public health, law enforcement, natural resources, and science.
    Housing assistance and community services.

  16. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    It is not a case of “if” sanctuary areas will last but “when” they will collapse . A few examples will be made on the 6:00 news. A few resistors barbecued David Koresh style and then the front end loaders will show up with loud speakers giving you 10 minutes to throw your weapons out the window and onto the streets. Smelters will be going full blast day and night and in a few months Virginia will be a 2A eliminated State. If the guard cannot handle it Then the Feds will call Lt. William Calley out of retirement with an evil grin on his face and a master of civilian massacres Mai Lai Style gunning down teenage girls with newborns in their arms and then send in the Storm Troopers with their helicopter gun ships and flame throwing tanks.

    As the Japanese will tell you killing civilians ala “Rape of Nanking” keeps the troops level of aggression and fighting spirit high for when they are needed to invade foreign countries for rape, pillage and profit.

    And Calley wil be interviewed on all the major left wing news media broadcasts. He will say “Who said the gold old days were gone forever”.

    1. avatar edward kenway's ghost says:

      Good God.
      Are you paid to write such fantasies or are you really that disturbed?

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Pretty sure their are TWO vlads – physically or split. The insanity runs dead in one.

  17. avatar JoinGOA,FPC,SAF says:

    Red flag laws are illegal as hell!

  18. avatar James R. says:

    One thing i have to ask is what good has the house Democraps done the last three years, except fight the duly elected President tooth and nail. They couldn’t get anything with the Rusky thing now they wast our tax moneys one impeachment? Oh yeah, there is their relentless infringment on our second amendment rights! I ask you what????

  19. avatar Alan says:

    And has The Court, in it’s august wisdom, or what passes therefore, accepted this foolishness, this bureaucratic double-talk, this blatant hogwash?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email