Red Greene, author of “I hear a warning fire bell in the night; do you?” (opinion page, Nov. 22) needs a history lesson. He describes Trump as a dictator that is only restrained by his staff. Question: What do all dictators and wannabe dictators have in common? They disarm law-abiding citizens. What political party wants to repeal the Second Amendment? When describing fascism, Red is describing the Democrat party’s agenda.

I heard the bell loud and clear when the Clinton and Obama regimes were in power. They wanted our guns. I didn’t hear the bell when Trump was elected president because he vigorously supports the Second Amendment, something wannabe tyrants do not do.

I can faintly hear the bell in Washington since the crazies, who support an all-powerful central government and want our guns, are in charge of the House of Representatives. The bell rings loud in California because the state is under total control by anti-Second Amendment Democrats.

(56) comments

bill jenkins

if you keep a piece to fend off the feds.
you should consider changing your meds.
the beat goes on
you bought the con.

DominiMMIV

No one wants to repeal the 2nd Amendment and to take your guns. What Democrats want is to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and mentally ill people with comprehensive gun control laws. Scared old white people need to get their news from multiple sources and not just Fox News while eating breakfast.

CookieG

Must be the two top evils that exist these days. "Old white people" and " different views" seems to be a common theme these days. Wonder where this comes from!

CheRojo

I wish the Democrats were 1/10th as aggressive on gun control as you think they are.

Adam Baum

Hey Bill,

Nobody is suggesting a firefight with the Feds. Oppressive gun laws are an indication which direction the country is heading.

bill jenkins

in japan you can't own a gun
is this the land of the setting sun?

Adam Baum

Hey Domini, The reason that you are still a democrat is because you don't know any better. Senator Diane Fineswine has stated that she would disarm Americans if she had the votes. Others of her ilk have the same sentiments.

BBB

Adam, aren't you a bit far from home? Don't you normally troll on the Guardian website? More likely, you're just another local gun lover, recycling 20 year old quotes that feed a fear of big brother taking weapons from your cold, dead hands. I'm sure Ron has room for you in his bunker out in Wonder Valley. Adam Baum. really?

Adam Baum

Hey Bill,
Why do you keep comparing the USA to other countries? We are not Japan, we are the USA and we have rights we don't want to give up. I you don't like 2A then maybe you should move to Japan.

If you are a democrat then you are the one who bought the con.

bill jenkins

the 2a was for the purpose of a militia reliable
that body is no longer viable
therefore 2a is not applyable

Adam Baum

Hey BBB,

Sounds like you have contempt for gun owners. What's wrong with being a firearms aficionado? Where did you see any 20 year old quotes? I was quoting your real time heroine Diane Fineswine. My name is Adam Baum. Its Jewish.

BBB

check it out: medium.com/@andybodle/the-curious-case-of-adam-baum
Just coincidence no doubt. Search came up empty for an Adam Baum in YV area.
Happy Hanukkah Adam.

bill jenkins

not to compare cultures in order to learn
is a cause for some concern.

bill jenkins

do you think the Jews at the "Tree of Life"will celebrate Hanukkah without strife?

TwoToeJoe

One of the most rabid vocal opponent of the second amendment is our own Senator Kamela Harris. While serving as our State District Attorney she actively recruited other state District Attorneys and filed an amicus brief in the District of Columbia Vs Heller hearing that argued that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual's right to own firearms. We know how that decision turned out. Kamela Harris in 2005 supported San Francisco's proposition H which would had prohibited most firearms within city limits. Luckily the courts also struck that one down too. I give thanks to our Constitution and the Bill of Rights for ensuring our God given rights are not taken away by our government. Kamela Harris regularly advocates anti-second amendment legislation that are not about keeping guns out of the hands of those who present a danger to themselves or others. She and her new Democrat cronies in congress are more interested in keeping guns out of the hands of everyone while setting those in prisons that present a danger to the public free.

Adam Baum

Hey Bill,
No point in arguing the Second Amendment since you are not going to move me and I'm not going to move you. What I would really like to know is why you lib's work so hard at taking away your own rights. Why do you work so hard to transform the greatest nation on earth into a third world socialist quagmire. What did America do to you? Other nations have nothing to offer us.

bill jenkins

i like my rights a lot
especially the one not to get shot

bill jenkins

other nations have nothing to offer is cute
you should check out the Max Plank institute
Max if you knew
was one really smart Danish jew

CookieG

Max Planck was neither Danish nor Jewish. He was a German and Lutheran. I am sure that Socialism is near and dear to your heart and the Right to Bear Arms is a thorn in your behind Bill but you should check with the ones pulling your strings and at least get some facts straight. Germany certainly had something to offer in the late 30's that was not cute and cost million's in lives. Wasn't the first thing they did was take the guns away and make life better?

bill jenkins

you are right to the core
i mixed him up with Niels Bore
i hope you are not sore

bill jenkins

here's a twist/if you like FEMA responces/ you'r a socialist

bill jenkins

arguing the a2 is a waste of time
but you're not the only one on line

bill jenkins

it's somewhat smarmy to think civilians could cope with an army

bill jenkins

the question about america is a bore
actually the to should a for

Adam Baum

Hey BBB, why are you so obsessed with my name? Are you guy's planning a hit on me? It's obvious that you lib's can't handle opposing view points. Lets not forget that "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" was written by L.Frank Baum. Am I detecting a note of anti-semitism?

bill jenkins

lets do that over
arguing the 2a with you is a waste of time
but you're not the only one on line

BBB

Hey bro, you're trying too hard. Like the Great Oz, smoke and mirrors seems to be your specialty.


bill jenkins

saying i'm trying to hard is a mistake
actually it's a piece of cake

CookieG

I agree. Bill does utilize his specialty of smoke and mirrors well. At least he does not perform background checks on commenters to make the discussion personal like some.

bill jenkins

if you were frank
i'll bet you never heard of Bohr or Plank

Adam Baum

Hey Joe,

Thanks for taking the time to write that post. It was very well written.

Best Regards, Adam Baum

BBB

Hey Bill,
Misdirection, reply meant for A. B..

spearman1ca

What Diane Feinstein did say in 1995 was that if she had the votes she would take away all assault rifles - not all the guns.

That fact is easily checked if one has the wisdom to check when a statement at its face value sounds absurd.

TwoToeJoe

Diane Feinstein did take away all handguns in San Francisco. She stated and I quote "As a supervisor, I had no protection so I got a gun permit and learned to shoot at the Police Academy. When I became mayor, I succeeded in passing a measure banning handguns in San Francisco, and we instituted a 90--day grace period for pistol owners to turn in their handguns without incurring penalties. At that time, I turned in my pistol. That pistol and 14 others were melted down and sculpted into a cross, which I presented to Pope John Paul II during a trip to Rome later that year. The point is, I know where guns work for protection, and I know where they don't. I've lived a life that has been impacted by weapons, so this is not an esoteric, academic exercise for me. Nor is it a political exercise. I come to this issue because of real life experience." This fact is easily checked if one has the wisdom to check when a statement at its face value sounds absurd. If she had the votes in congress she would had taken away guns just as she did in San Francisco. Like I stated before thank God for our constitution.

spearman1ca

Two Toe Joe - Do you even know what it takes to repeal the 2A as to let alone change the wording?

A hint - 51 votes in the senate does not hack it.

I suggest you get real as to what a politician can do and can not do.

I am neither liberal or conservative. I simply know how the constitution works and do not rely on propaganda sources such a Fox and MSNBC to determine what is reality.

TwoToeJoe

I never mentioned a repeal or a change of wording of the second amendment. Before making such an accusation maybe you should had paid a little more attention in what I actually said instead of inferring such propaganda. I pointed out how politicians such as Dianne Feinstein disregard our second amendment and pass laws that are unconstitutional. I would suggest you get real as to what a politician can and can not do. Retired liberal justice John Paul Stevens wrote an op-ed saying the 2nd Amendment should be amended not me. It is time to stop the propaganda and face reality as to what is really going on instead of making excuses.

BBB

J.P. Stevens is right on target with his OP/ED to amend the 2A. There will be a day when this country is ready to put limits on the types of firearms that are constitutionally protected. I don't remember the year, but in the 70's, both my father and dropped NRA membership because of this issue. Peeling the bumper sticker off the old truck wasn't that big of a deal.

CookieG

Hate to bust your bubble but there are already limits on firearms constitutionally protected. Having both of your fathers peeling a bumper sticker off the old truck should had been a breeze.

spearman1ca

TTJ,

Concur in your thoughts. It simply appears to me, from your tone, you seem to think democrats are out to repeal the 2A, which they are not.

I know of no case where any entity in the United States forcibly took weapons away from those that already own them.

What has transpired is various entities trying to make getting more guns and accessories - bump stacks for instance - more difficult to obtain along with armor piercing ammunition and a litany of other firearm related items.

Those actions are not in violation to the 2A just as 29 Palms ordinance to disobey the law of the State as it relates to medicinal and recreational marijuana.

I believe in the right of an individual to own a firearm. I do not believe one has the right under the 2A to own military weapons of war.

We will sure differ on that issue.

As for Diane Feinstein the quote you provided was cherry picked. She owned a firearm and carried one with a CCW.

She as well as others saw where America was headed in regards to mass shootings well before the majority of Americans did and morphed her thoughts and opinions. That is her right as an American - to grow and change in her opinions of what is allowed and what perhaps should not be allowed.


I appreciate the exchange of thoughts and I am sure other readers do too.

Thank you for the discourse.

TwoToeJoe

There are cases of law enforcement forcibly taking weapons away from citizens. Citizens were routinely disarmed during hurricane Katrina while attempting to prevent looting and provide personal security . The Government does not need to forcibly take firearms. All they have to do is pass ordinances such as Diane Feinstein attempted in San Francisco to ban handguns for personal home defense and turn in their firearms . Possessing a handgun would have been a misdemeanor punishable by 30 days to six months in jail. The Board of Supervisors voted in favor of the law but thankfully the Court of Appeals deemed it unconstitutional because it was in violation of the second amendment. Diane Feinstein attempted to impose her morphed thoughts and opinions upon the citizens by the ban with complete disregard towards the Bill of Rights. Our Constitution prevented her from imposing her desire of what she determined to be allowed or not to be allowed. Sadly there are many more cases of attempts to undermine our second amendment rights as we have seen in DC and Chicago and each time so far our Bill of Rights have prevailed. Much can be debated about our Second Amendment rights but attempts to directly circumvent the right to possess firearms for personal safety and security should never be infringed upon lawful abiding citizens. I also appreciate the exchange of thoughts and ideas and value all of our individual God given rights as noted by the Bill of Rights as I am sure you do also. Thank you for your discourse.

horsehouse

"What do all dictators and wannabe dictators have in common? They disarm law-abiding citizens." So says the writer. Mussolini joined armed fascist militiamen to intimidate a greatly divided Italian government. He managed to become prime minister reduced the influence of the judiciary, muzzled a free press, condoned fascist squad violence to consolidate power until later declaring himself dictator. Just thought I should question the accuracy of the writer’s statement about dictators taking guns. So frequently "law abiding citizens" seems to be based solely on one's own perspective.

spearman1ca

Again TTJ you distort the facts.

Of course law enforcement took weapons from vagabonds during natural disasters such as Katrina because for some reason those enthusiasts seem to think they can brandish such firearms against normal citizens and law enforcement.

I am a law enforcement officer and I do not appreciate going to a call for service and wondering if an individual at that location is armed with an AR15 and all I have is a Glock 21.

I think you might be an enthusiast about weapons.


I have a military collection of weapons that are not loaded. A German Lugar and a K98.


My duty weapon is locked in a case when I am not on duty. For 27 years I have never needed or wanted an assault weapon.


How many assault weapons do you own?

bill jenkins

spearman: thanx for this great post! sadly however it only points out the success
of the nra/gun mfg's con. i only wish we had more in your position speak out. i would
be interested in knowing how many gun guys would like to join you on your next
call where there is a risk of a firefight.

TwoToeJoe

Distorting the facts is what you do well Steve. Law enforcement did forcefully confiscate firearms from law abiding citizens during hurricane Katrina. It was so egregious that congress passed the DISASTER RECOVERY PERSONAL PROTECTION ACT in 2006 to prevent law enforcement from seizing firearms from normal citizens protecting their life and property. This law was not passed to protect vagabonds. This law was intended to prevent the government from seizing legally-owned firearms from "normal" legally armed citizens during a time of a disaster. This law was not passed to protect thugs and vagabonds from brandishing firearms. This law was passed because the second amendment right to bear arms to protect life and property was violated during a time of a national emergency when citizens needed it most. Your statement "I know of no case where any entity in the United States forcibly took weapons away from those that already own them" was a false statement. Your statement " I do not believe one has the right under the 2A to own military weapons of war" and then claim that you " have a military collection of weapons that are not loaded. A German Lugar and a K98" seems to be some what hypocritical depending on your definition. I would say good for you and our second amendment. But that does seem to give some credence that you may be a "gun enthusiast". My question is a "gun enthusiast" a bad person as I seem to interpret possibly in your "tone" in the comment "I think you might be an enthusiast about weapons"? I have never had the need to own a "German Lugar and a K98" but I respect your right and desire to own them. All law enforcement officers fear for their safety when responding to service calls and it is never limited towards any particular weapon or firearms. All law enforcement officers respond to service calls and have a fear of "German lugers", "K98's", "Glock 21's", as well as all rifles, handguns, shotguns, knives, clubs, sharps, bodily fluids or anything that pose a threat towards officer safety. Perhaps instead of asking "How many assault weapons do you own?" a better question should be "how many weapons I own that pose a threat towards officer safety" if that is your concern.

BBB

Looks like the NRA is winning the numbers game. According to the CDC, almost 40,000 folks died in 2017 from firearms, the highest number in 21 years. There has been an increase of suicides by gun in the past eight years, with the highest spike in states with highest percentages of gun owners. The CDC said the suicides drove the numbers up over past years.

Spearman's weapon of war is a bolt-action carbine that accepts a five round clip, while TTJ's AR-15, if illegally modified has a rate-of-fire of 800 rounds-per-minute. Not modified 45 rounds-per-minute. As a former member of LE , TTJ's AR-15 is no doubt legal.
Ironically, the limitations in urban fighting pushed the Germans to phase out the K98 and went to the Strumgewehr44 , the first assault type- rifle used in warfare.

CookieG

I was looking forward for the continued discussion between TTJ and Spearman. I certainly understand the desire to steer the discussion away from the simple second amendment issue towards the more divisive assault weapon topic. I know Spearman has claimed that TTJ has distorted some facts but it must have been in some sort of code since it was not clear to me. I think Spearman would like a change of topic in order to dig himself out of the deep hole he has placed himself in. Spearman has dangled quite a many carrots out there but somehow TTJ remains steadfast on topic which was the second amendment. It was a good discussion while it lasted. I thought it was finished at one time until more bait was tossed.

bill jenkins

when does the all regulated meet next?

spearman1ca

A good discussion that is for sure.

TTJ and I, as well as others, will more than likely not meet a compromise on these issues.

As was well pointed out my two historic weapons are as effective today as a blunderbuss as compared to the modified, bump stock AR-15.


TTJ reminds me of a time that I took an intoxicated 16 year old back to his home in Wonder Valley. It was about two in the morning.


I drove up the dirt road driveway with my overhead lights on and then pulled up about 20 yards from the front door of the small household. I knocked on the door and then waited for and answer.

I got my answer when the boys father opened the door pointing an UZI type weapon right at my chest.


I pulled my, at that time Glock 19, and told him to drop it. Which he did.


Point of the story from my viewpoint was I was a dead man and why in the world did a man need an Uzi in Wonder Valley?


Anyways the boy was handed over without a trip to juvie hall and all ended well - except - why can I still see that weapon pointed at me after 20 plus years?

Again a good conversation.

TwoToeJoe

Again Steve where or what exactly was my "distortion of facts"? In this "good discussion" never once did I even mention "assault weapons" other than responding to your attempt to change the second amendment topic to a "assault weapon" issue. I have already pointed out your distortion of the "facts" in this discussion. Help everyone out and simply point out my "distortion of facts" in this discussion. If you can not point out any of my "distortion of facts" just tell us another good story to deflect from the simple second amendment issue to get the "conversation" going in a different direction. Unfortunately Steve, like so many others, you do that well.

spearman1ca

Hi TTJ,

Maybe this link might help the readers.

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/08/nra-hurricane-katrina-gun-confiscation/

Mistakes were surely made in a Martial Law environment but those mistakes do not constitute an attempt by Democrats to take firearms in violation of the 2A.

That is where this whole discussion started as witnessed by the lead of the story.

To say the NRA and or the Democrats as well as the republicans do not cherry pick talking points is...…. at face value ludicrous.

I hope you like my stories. I have more.

Take care my man.

TwoToeJoe

Thanks Steve for getting back on track and submitting the 'cherry picked" "opinion" by "Adam Weinstein" in the anti-second amendment website called "The Trace". It could be suitable for your needs but I would refer you to what congress found in it's investigation that exposed the truth.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr5013/text
Congress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution states that a `well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed', and Congress has repeatedly recognized this language as protecting an individual right.
(2) In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, State and local law enforcement and public safety service organizations were overwhelmed and could not fulfill the safety needs of the citizens of the State of Louisiana.
(3) In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the safety of these citizens, and of their homes and property, was threatened by instances of criminal activity.
(4) Many of these citizens lawfully kept firearms for the safety of themselves, their loved ones, their businesses, and their property, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and used their firearms, individually or in concert with their neighbors, for protection against crime.
(5) In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, certain agencies confiscated the firearms of these citizens in contravention of the Second Amendment, depriving these citizens of the right to keep and bear arms and rendering them helpless against criminal activity.
(6) These confiscations were carried out at gunpoint by nonconsensual entries into private homes, by traffic checkpoints, by stoppage of boats, and otherwise by force.
(7) The citizens from whom firearms were confiscated were either in their own homes or attempting to flee the flooding and devastation by means of motor vehicle or boat, and were accosted, stopped, and arbitrarily deprived of their private property and means of protection.
(8) The means by which the confiscations were carried out, which included intrusion into the home, temporary detention of persons, and seizures of property, constituted unreasonable searches and seizures and deprived these citizens of liberty and property without due process of law in violation of fundamental rights under the Constitution.
(9) Many citizens who took temporary refuge in emergency housing were prohibited from storing firearms on the premises, and were thus treated as second-class citizens who had forfeited their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
(10) At least one highly-qualified search and rescue team was prevented from joining in relief efforts because the team included individuals with firearms, although these individuals had been deputized as Federal law enforcement officers.
(11) These confiscations and prohibitions, and the means by which they were carried out, deprived the citizens of Louisiana not only of their right to keep and bear arms, but also of their rights to personal security, personal liberty, and private property, all in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States.

TwoToeJoe

And by the way I do like your stories. Kimberly Watkins has a good story but alas it still does not apply towards the second amendment. Be safe and take care my man!

spearman1ca

Ah - the key word in 2A "Militia".

I am not sure … but when the 2A was worded there was no intent by the founding fathers to form a standing army. These gentlemen were in the position of fighting a foreign power that had the best standing army in the world - the British at the time. The thought I believe was to have the citizens armed so as to form a militia when and if the need arose to use it. I think standing armies were anathema to them based upon their experiences in Europe.

Fast forward to 2018. Tell me what militia will stand up to the United States Army given any contingency?

Even SCJ Scalia thought the 2A was not a license for unlimited weapons ownership but it could be limited.


To paraphrase his thoughts - we have the right to own weapons but we do not have the right to own whatever weapons we want.


Voila the AR-15 and all the death it has brought.

Time to go back to muskets maybe?

spearman1ca

BTW - that was the best cherry picked Congressional report I have even seen! Awesome!

Lets see who was the majority at the time and who was president?

Congress Republican - Senate Republican - President Republican.

Of course there was a democratic onslaught to destroy the 2A.

Come on TTJ you can do better than that.

TwoToeJoe

Sorry Steve, the Supreme Court determines constitutional interpretations and limitations. Not you, not me, and especially those who want to instill their individual interpretations gets to decide. Personally I agree with the interpretation of the right to own a firearm for personal protection. Certainly the issue of determining what is legal and what is illegal is a contemptuous issue and is debatable in anyone's opinion. Sad to say some people in this country despise our Second Amendment and will say and do anything to justify amending it to suit their wants and desires. Until that time arrives those of us who enjoy the individual right to own firearms such as German Lugers and K98's or any other firearm for the purpose of enjoyment or self defense should be as interpreted. To seize and confiscate firearms was and is a direct violation of the interpretation of our Second Amendment. The passage of the DISASTER RECOVERY PERSONAL PROTECTION ACT was not forced upon us by either Republicans nor Democrats. It was passed by bipartisan support but definitely highlighted the values of those who support our Second Amendment and those who hold the Second Amendment in contempt. Personally in my opinion I agreed with this act as I saw the firearm confiscation in New Orleans as egregious. You certainly can have the opinion that the Act was passed to protect vagabonds and criminals as you duly inferred. I thought that even you could have done better than that.

spearman1ca

This might be approaching the longest running thread ever - LOL.

Agree with you on almost all you say except for your perceived support of the author that the democrats are out to get "your" guns - which they are not.

Should we agree that democrats are not out to rescind the 2A and take "your' guns a common denominator might be achieved where constructive discourse could occur. Which BTW you and I have had over the days as far as I am concerned.


The Supreme Court is there to interpret the Constitution and one prominent figure in that court was Scalia.


I support limitations on the right for individuals to own weapons, as well as what type of weapons as proposed by Scalia, as well as limiting the advertising rights of the NRA to support unlimited ownership of weapons of mass casualties as we saw in las Vegas. You do not. I understand that and appreciate your position - so please appreciate mine.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.