Thread: White House: Obama Will Act ‘Administratively’ and ‘Unilaterally’ On Guns

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking...ro/HB0170I.PDF






http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking...ro/HB0170I.PDF

#UNSmallArmsTreaty #RightToBearArms SHOW THEM THE EXIT DOOR! #SecondAmendment #ConstitutionOfTheUnitedStates #GunRights #GunOwnership 

Thomas Jefferson on the topic of Firearms


July 18, 2014

---

Binaryloop | I've lived all over the US and found that most Americans love liberty but, get fooled into partisan politics. My goal is to wake people up and help them see it's not about left or right -- it's about freedom!

---

Opinions from Liberty Crier contributors and members are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of The Liberty Crier.




In 1785 Thomas Jefferson wrote to his fifteen-year-old nephew, Peter Carr, regarding what he considered the best form of exercise:
“…I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.”
Evidence exists to show that Jefferson was a fair marksman. At twenty-five he noted in his accounts: “Won shooting 1/6.” In a later contest during a muster of Captain Jacob Moon’s Albemarle County militia company he lost 2/6. But as he grew older, Jefferson limited his exercise to horseback riding while restraining his attachment for firearms and hunting.
References to ownership of arms and accoutrements may be found throughout his manuscripts and accounts. A cursory compilation shows that he owned a shotgun called a “two shot-double barrel,” purchased in France, a number of pistols and other shoulder weapons.
Thomas Jefferson on the topic of Firearms [continued]


Read more at http://libertycrier.com/thomas-jeffe...PPOEAiJs4Zb.99





An article courtesy of the Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia. Click for more.


Filed in:

Personal Life



Search the Encyclopedia


Learn More at the Jefferson Library »





See Also:

Fishing
Hunting





Firearms



In 1785 Thomas Jefferson wrote to his fifteen-year-old nephew, Peter Carr, regarding what he considered the best form of exercise: "...I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."[1]
Evidence exists to show that Jefferson was a fair marksman. At twenty-five he noted in his accounts: "Won shooting 1/6."[2] In a later contest during a muster of Captain Jacob Moon's Albemarle County militia company he lost 2/6.[3] But as he grew older, Jefferson limited his exercise to horseback riding while restraining his attachment for firearms and hunting.
References to ownership of arms and accoutrements may be found throughout his manuscripts and accounts. A cursory compilation shows that he owned a shotgun called a "two shot-double barrel," purchased in France, a number of pistols and other shoulder weapons. Further evidence that he used these may be found in the columns of his account books. In 1775 he paid to have a pistol repaired; a year later he bought a "double barrel gun-lock" for £5-5; in 1799 he had Henry Yost, a Staunton, Virginia gunsmith, mend his pistols (possibly those he carried for protection when traveling) and, as late as 1817 he was charged eight dollars for having a gun put in order by a Charlottesville repairman.[4]
Unquestionably, the finest arms that Jefferson owned were a pair of Turkish pistols received from the estate of General Isaac Zane in place of a money bequest. He described them and, at the same time, modestly alluded to his ability as a pistol shot: "They are 20. inch barrels so well made that I never missed a squirrel at 30 yards with them..."[5]
- Text from James A. Bear, "Some Jefferson Ideas on Exercise, Guns and Game," Monticello Research Report, n.d.
Primary Source References

1785 August 19. (Jefferson to Peter Carr). "As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."[6]
1790. Shipped back from France (Grevin list): one pair large pistolet in leather case, one pair plated pistolet, one fusil à deux coups, one pistol and its case, two pistol cases, one powder horn, one morocco ammo pouch.[7]
1798 January 30. (Thomas Mann Randolph to Jefferson). Referring to a gun found in the possession of an enslaved man at Belmont: "The gun I suspect to be yours but cannot positively decide being familiar only with the Pistoias."[8]
1803 October 9. (Jefferson to Verdier, innkeeper at Orange Courthouse). "I left at your house, the morning after I lodged there, a pistol in a locked case, which no doubt was found in your bar after my departure. I have written to [illegible] Mr. Randolph or Mr. Eppes to call on you for it, as they come on to Congress, to either of whom therefore be so good as to deliver it."[9]
1803 October 9. (Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr.). "I left at Orange C. H. one of my Turkish pistols, in it's hoster, locked. I shall be glad if either yourself or Mr. Eppes can let a servant take it on to this place. It will either bind up in a portmanteau flap, or sling over the back of the servant conveniently."[10]
1811 September 6. (Jefferson to Francis Wayles Eppes). "...it will then be a question for the consideration of your papa and yourself whether you shall not return with us & visit your cousins. this will be acceptable to us all, and only deprecated by the partridges & snow birds against which you may commence hostilities."[11]
1816 August 15. (Jefferson to Payne Todd.) "You must now accept a keep-sake from me, which may suit you as a sportsman, better than myself who have ceased to be one. I send by the stage, to be lodged for you at Orange C.H. a box containing a pair of Turkish pistols. They were originally with wheel-locks, which not being convenient, I had locks of the modern form substituted, but so that they can be changed for the former in a moment. They are 20. inch barrels so well made that I never missed a squirrel 30. yards with them. I fixed one in a wooden holster to hang in the loop of the pommel of [my saddle] to be handily taken out and in...I had other holsters also made for both [to] hang them at the side of my carriage for road use, and with locks and staples to secure them from being handled by curious people. One of the wheel locks is a little out of order, and will require a skilful gunsmith to put to rights."[12]
1816 December 17. "Note he [Thomas Jefferson Randolph] has paid Garner 8.D. for having had a gun of mine repaired."[13]
1817 January 20. "Pd. Davis for mending gun lock 1.D."[14]
1819 November 28. (Eliza Trist to Nicholas Trist). "Mr. Jefferson I hear takes his daily rides and some one told me that they saw him in Milton with a Gun on his shoulder in pursuit of Partridges..."[15]
1822 July 20. (Jefferson to Peter Minor) "...I ask the acceptance, by your son, of a keep-sake from me. It is an article of the tackle of a gun-man, offering the convenience of carrying the powder & shot together. I presume he is a gun-man, as I am sure he ought to be, and every American who wishes to protect his farm from the ravages of quadrupeds & his country from those of biped invaders."[16]
1823 July 15. "pd. Mr. Winn for a gun for Benjamin 18.D."[17]
1824 July 4. "Drew on Raphael in favr. J. Kelly for 17.D. for a gun."[18]
1825 September 1. (Jefferson to Louis Xaupi). "An application from young gentlemen of the University for the appropriation of a room wherein they might receive instruction in the use of the small sword having led me to the consideration of that subject previously to the receipt of your letter of yesterday, I inclose you my answer to them, which I pray you to receive as equally an answer to yourself. The other part of your request, for the use of a room for instructing them in the art of dancing, stands on more favorable ground. It's object is the embellishment, and not the destruction, of the lives of our young citizens, and the Visitors seem to have provided for it in the statute which enacts that one of the elliptical rooms on the middle floor of the Rotunda shall be used for 'schools of instruction in drawing, music, or any other of the innocent and ornamental accomplishments of life.' Dancing is generally, and justly I think, considered among innocent accomplishments; while we cannot so consider the art of stabbing and pistolling our friends, or dexterity in the practice of an instrument exclusively used for killing our fellow-citizens only and never against the public enemy."[19]

Further Sources

• Halsey, Ashley Jr. "How Thomas Jefferson's Pistols Were Restored." American Rifleman November (1969): 21-22.
• Halsey, Ashley Jr. and John M. Snyder. "Jefferson's Beloved Guns." American Rifleman November (1969): 17-20.

Footnotes

• 1. Jefferson to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785, in PTJ 8:407.
• 2. MB, 1:81.
• 3. Ibid., 1:150.
• 4. All references are from MB; see index under Miscellaneous Articles > Firearms.
• 5. Jefferson to John Payne Todd, August 15, 1816. Polygraph copy at the Library of Congress.
• 6. Jefferson to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785, in PTJ 8:407.
• 7. The Grevin Packing List is located in the William Short Papers at the Library of Congress. An explanation and summary of its contents is available in PTJ, 18:30-39.
• 8. PTJ, 30:69.
• 9. Letterpress copy at the Library of Congress.
• 10. Letterpress copy at the Library of Congress.
• 11. PTJ:RS, 4:131.
• 12. Massachusetts Historical Society.
• 13. MB, 2:1329.
• 14. Ibid., 2:1330.
• 15. Nicholas Philip Trist Papers, Library of Congress.
• 16. Massachusetts Historical Society.
• 17. MB, 2:1397. Benjamin Franklin Randolph's 15th birthday was July 14.
• 18. Ibid., 1404.
• 19. Polygraph copy at the Library of Congress.

http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/firearms

Liberals Outraged After Restaurant Owner Puts Up EPIC Pro-Gun Sign

If one thing has been made clear over time, it’s that guns reduce crime. Despite many criminals using guns to carry out their illicit behavior, when ordinary citizens have guns, that’s when you see crime rates drop.
One restaurant owner recently sought to take advantage of that fact and put up an epic pro-gun sign that had people praising her for it – and boy are Liberals ticked.
Sharma Floyd, owns the Shiloh Brew and Chew in Maryville, Tennessee, where she’s heard of the places such as Chipotle and Target recently banning guns from their premises and having their stores subsequently robbed just days later. Taking advantage of the fact that criminals are cowards, she decided to put up a sign of her own.

Now on the front door, a sign reads, “Guns are Welcome,” and as Floyd explains, that the response has been overwhelmingly positive. She further detailed, “I can honestly say I have gotten way more support than the one person who really gave me a lot of grief over it.”
She isn’t shedding any tears over the matter however as she notes she’s gained at least 20 new customers due to word spreading throughout the town. So what do you guys think – should we allow more guns into businesses across America? Let us know in the comments below.
H/T: Mr. Conservative

http://tellmenow.com/2014/07/liberal...-pro-gun-sign/

County Sheriff Tells Residents to Get a Gun

Posted 8 hours ago by Dave Jolly

Harnett County, North Carolina is located in the central part of the state between Raleigh and Fayetteville. The county is mostly rural with a population of just over 100,000 people.

Lately, there has been an increase in violent crimes and the citizens of Harnett County are growing concerned and scared. Just in the past few weeks, several people have been shot and killed and others injured, so about 130 residents gathered at a local church to pray about the violence and ask questions of what they can do.

Harnett County Sheriff Larry Rollins was at the meeting and when the people asked him what they can do, he responded:

“Even though I’m a cop, I don’t go anywhere without a gun. I want my deputies to get there just as fast as they possibly can if you’ve got a problem. But you better be able to take care of business before we get there if you need to protect your family.”

“Violence is all around us. I mean it’s sad we have to have that attitude, but I am going to protect myself and my family.”

video at link below

Sheriff Rollins answer to the growing violence joins the same responses from more and more law enforcement officials throughout the country. Perhaps the most notable example was Detroit’s Police Chief James Craig. Jerry Henry, President and Founder of GeorgiaCarry.org commented about Chief Craig:

“Most of the sheriffs in the country believe in the Second Amendment. It’s an elected office so they don’t have much choice.”

“My opinion is, if police chiefs believe in this right, they should state that, but they’re hired by mayors and city councils that often are not in favor of gun ownership so that’s more unusual, especially in the bigger cities. The chief of Detroit, he was a strong proponent of gun control but when he got over there (to Detroit), he saw the light.”

“That’s all political with police chiefs, I can assure you of that. I have seen police chiefs of universities who have made some rather stupid statements because their boss was there when I knew for a fact they didn’t believe what they were saying. I won’t name names, but they say what the boss wants them to say for the most part.”

People need to be aware that the role of police and sheriff deputies is not the protection of the people. This is a misconception that so many have. According to the US Supreme Court decision in Warren v. District of Columbia in 1981, the police do not have the duty to provide protection and services to individuals except under specific assignments.

If the police, sheriff deputies or any other law enforcement agency is not legally responsible for your protection, then you need to heed the words of Sheriff Rollins and do what you have to do to protect you and your family. In most cases, that means getting a gun and learning how to use it. I’ve always been taught to lead by example, but when our nation’s leaders don’t obey the laws, you can’t expect the citizens to either. Consequently we are seeing increases in violent crimes in many areas of the country, including Harnett County, North Carolina.

If anyone wants to know where to get a gun from, I strongly suggest you check out Liberty Guns. They will answer all of your questions and help you purchase the gun that’s right for you and your family. They may even be able to help lead you to a place in your area that will help train you to shoot and learn how to defend yourself.

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/16564/c...K2zhx6blje5.99

NC Sheriff Tells Residents to Arm Themselves

Posted on August 6, 2014 by Gary DeMar

Bank robber Willie Sutton (1901-1980), when asked, “Why do you rob banks?,” reportedly said, “Because that’s where the money is.”[1]
In a similar way criminals with guns know who to go after: People without guns. Why take the risk with somebody who carries a gun? You might as well pull a gun on a person you know is unarmed. It’s safer, and most likely you want have to pull the trigger.


Lately, however, more people are arming themselves and it’s beginning to pay big dividends. Word is getting out that more people are paying attention to the arguments of people who know the statistics: More guns in the hands of the right people means less crime.

John R. Lott, Jr., author of More Guns, Less Crime, says:
“States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. Thirty-one states now have such laws—called ‘shall-issue’ laws. These laws allow adults the right to carry concealed handguns if they do not have a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness.

*****

“Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.”
These points have been made over and over again, so it’s not surprising that a sheriff from North Carolina is encouraging people in his small town to arm themselves because of an uptick in violence.
________________________________________

LILLINGTON, N.C. — The Harnett County sheriff expressed concern Monday evening about a recent spike of violent crime, and he’s even told residents to start arming themselves.

WTVD-TV reported that more than 100 people packed the sanctuary of the Spring Hill United Methodist Church Monday night for a community meeting on crime. There has been an explosion of violence and crime in the area, especially in the last few weeks.
Sheriff Larry Rollins told the crowd that the violence is fueled by gangs and drugs. He urged everyone to protect themselves, saying he doesn’t go anywhere without a gun.

“When I am out with my family, even though I am a cop, I don’t go anywhere without a gun,” Rollins told the crowd. “I mean it’s sad we have to have that attitude, but I am going to protect myself and my family. I want my deputies at your house just as fast as they can when you got a problem, but you better be able to take care of business until we get there if you have to protect your family.”

This part of the county’s landscape of rural life is quickly giving way to a population boom, and residents are worried. Several residents said they are afraid to leave their homes — afraid of the growing violence.

One resident said she goes to church, and prays but is still afraid. It’s a sentiment shared by other families as well.

“I think they are working hard trying to get solutions, for us which comforts us a little bit, but still, knowing it’s out there and knowing it happens every day, still doesn’t make you feel safe,” said resident Jamie Salmon.

Several speakers urged the residents to call deputies if they see something suspicious, and to keep a sharp eye out for themselves and their neighbors.

Notes:

• In reality, Sutton never said it. But because Sutton was a thief, it did not stop him from using a version of it for one of his book titles: Where the Money Was (1976). [↩]

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/16559/n...ggeXXMoxMEu.99

The People of Missouri Have Spoken About the Right to Keep and Bear Arms: Amendment 5 Passes

Lorri Anderson 3 hours ago

On August 5, 2014 the citizens of Missouri spoke loud and clear in support of their unalienable right to bear arms. Amendment 5 was/is an extremely important amendment that will change the "Inalienable" rights of Missouri citizens to "Unalienable" rights. The "Unofficial" vote has shown that the people of Missouri voted overwhelmingly in favor of this amendment by over half of their voting population.

Constitutional Amendment 5

• 3898 of 3898 Precincts Reported
• YES 602,076 60.970%
• NO 385,422 39.030%
• Total Votes: 987,498

Why is this so important? Why is this a major move in the right direction for liberty? What is the difference? Let us look back in history, into the definitions, and see why this is so important to all citizens.

Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights. Morrison v. State, Mo. App., 252 S.W.2d 97, 101.

You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government. Persons have inalienable rights. Most state constitutions recognize only inalienable rights.

Unalienable rights: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred." Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523: You can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and can not under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. All individual's have unalienable rights.

Now that we have covered the definitions lets cover the historic significance.

The Declaration of Independence states:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain UNALIENABLE (emphasis mine) rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Why is that so important? Our founding fathers recognized our rights were given to us by God. No man is above God, and no man can take away what God has freely given every individual soul. This is why our founders chose the wording they did. Our founding fathers were very aware of tyranny, oppression, and how the British crown had used their power and influence to steal unalienable rights from their people. Our founders wanted to confirm on paper that these rights could never be touched or altered by any man. They were very wise men, wouldn't you say?

As you can see "Inalienable" rights can be given away as long as you consent. Ex: Consenting to "gun control" laws via vote by politicians. Because we voted these politicians into office, their vote is considered to be our vote (even when they vote against our wishes). Thus we inadvertently gave consent to take away our "inalienable" rights by voting those politicians into office. This is why politicians always "claim" they are voting for the people, or they are doing what the people are demanding of them. When your rights are "Unalienable" these rights are unable to be "voted" on because they are not transferable in any form or fashion. Unalienable rights are inherently yours from the time you take your first breath until the day you die. Most politicians do not want you to realize that you have "Unalienable" rights. When the people recognize their "Unalienable rights" the politicians loose their right to control the people via illegal laws, codes, or ordinances they pass. Any "law" that is contrary to your "Unalienable right" is no law at all for they can not be transferred, nor given away.

The Missouri Constitution Section 23 currently reads:
The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. Source: Const. of 1875, Art. II, Sec. 17
Here is Amendment 5 in which the Missouri Constitution will be changed to:

Section 23. The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms, ammunition, and accessories typical to the normal function of such arms, in defense of his home, person, family, and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. The rights guaranteed by this section shall be unalienable. Any restriction on these rights shall be subject to strict scrutiny and the state of Missouri shall be obligated to uphold these rights and shall under no circumstances decline to protect against their infringement. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the general assembly from enacting general laws which limit the rights of convicted violent felons or those adjudicated by a court to be a danger to self or others as a result of a mental disorder or mental infirmity.

EXPLANATION.. Matter enclosed in bold-faced brackets [thus] in this bill is not enacted and is intended to be omitted in the law.
(Bold emphasis mine)

Missouri Amendment 5
Notice that not only have the people gained their "Unalienable rights" back. They have also nullified the previous wording "but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons" unlawful provision in their constitution. Why is it unlawful? Because the "right to bear arms" has always been an "Unalienable right."

Good for Missouri I salute all who stood and fought for liberty. A great victory was won on behalf of the people yesterday. Enjoy your "Unalienable right" to bear arms responsibly as the founding fathers intended.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.


Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/08/pe...ZwTjxXpIQfg.99

Love these video's