Because he thought he would get away with it. Why did he think that? Because he's a member of The Gang.
See my previous posts about the murder of LaVoy Finicum. Notice he won't be charged with attempted murder, but lying on his official statement. The narrator here couldn't tell the truth about the Finicum murder to save his life.
Police have dramatically changed their account of how the Las Vegas massacrebegan on Oct. 1, revealing Monday that the gunman shot a hotel security guard six minutes before opening fire on a country-music concert — raising new questions about why police weren’t able to pinpoint the gunman’s location sooner.
It reminds me of when I was distributing Waco: The Rules of Engagement. I would loop it constantly at gun shows and Preparedness Expos all over the country. People would watch a few minutes and see how the FBI was lying about their actions and say, "Well, now THAT doesn't make any sense. Why'd they do that...?" They would quizzically ask the question two or three times before it would dawn on them that asking the question gave them the answer. They were being lied to. They would either leave with a look of horror on their faces or buy a copy of the video.
Again, from the LA Times piece:
But Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo said Monday that Paddock shot Campos before his mass shooting — at 9:59 p.m. — and they now don’t know why Paddock stopped his attack on the crowd.
Because he was dead, thats why. He was shot dead by his handlers, probably before the mass murder began.
This killing happened in front of, and in near proximity to, an innocent woman and a toddler.
You will hear Castile say very calmly that he had a firearm.
When Yanez tells him "Don't reach for it...", Castile calmly says, "I'm NOT reaching for it."
Little did he know he was about to be murdered. Yanez experienced TERROR at the thought of a mere mortal, a mere mundane, a mere "civilian", being in possession of a firearm in his presence.
Yanez' panic and extreme emotional state justified the killing of a citizen who's crime was a broken tail light.
Remember, this is how our police are trained. Anyone and everyone is out to kill them. That is their attitude. Any posture on the part of the citizen which does not resemble groveling, obeisance, and prostration, may very well get him killed.
They tell each other, "Don't worry, bud... we got yer back!"
Look! A Subject (formerly known as a citizen) in the presence of a Policeman. This is the ONLY posture which "may" preserve your life.
I commented on this first here. Philando Castile was shot because he was carrying concealed, with permission from the State, and he wasn't groveling in fear. Failure to Grovel is a capital offense these days.
I then further commented on this story here. I originally thought the prosecutor's office would decline to prosecute a member of the Gang. After Officer Yanez was charged, I thought for a moment a dead man's family would receive justice.
"Fast and Furious", the criminal operation not the movie, is about to burst open again.
The New York Post finally gets it right in one paragraph. Here it is:
Fast and Furious was a Justice Department program that allowed assault weapons — including .50-caliber rifles powerful enough to take down a helicopter — to be sold to Mexican drug cartels allegedly as a way to track them. But internal documents later revealed the real goal was to gin up a crisis requiring a crackdown on guns in America. Fast and Furious was merely a pretext for imposing stricter gun laws.
Well now, isn't it refreshing to see a news outlet telling the truth for a change?
So, for your perusal, here is what I would have posted there.
TL, In my misspent youth I thought like SW Richmond. My exposure to religion was limited to bible thumpers demanding I believe as they did or I was going to hell.
I asked, "Who says so?"
The reply was always, "Its in the Hooleh Buy-able!"
My question was always, "What makes it Holy and who wrote it?"
I could never get a definite response. "Its ancient scripture! It comes from God! It was inspired!"
I was told, "You have to believe!"
I asked, "Why?"
I was told, "Cuz ya have to!"
I asked, "Why?"
"Cuz ya have to!"
"Cuz ya have to!"
I was screamed at, "You'll burn in hell!"
"Who says so?"
"Its in the Hooleh Buy-able!"
Oh jeez, here we go again... (I joke now, fictitiously, that there was a preacher with a crooked finger pointing at me saying, instead of the above response, "It fell out of the sky! And landed in my lap! Signifying that I am to bring the Gospel to you!")
I was the same adrift person, trying to be good and do good generally, without a moral anchor, nor a compass. I didn't understand, that the values which guided me, the values of Western (White, European) Civilization are the values of Christendom. Studying history, and studying the Communist
movement helped to guide me. My question was, why do the Communists keep winning? The answer I came to was, it is because they are at war with Western Christian civilization, absolutely committed, and vicious. They are at war with everything that, I assumed from my environment, is good. They are destructive of humanity itself. We, on the other hand, have been in the process of abandoning our compass and our anchor for five hundred years. We have left the door wide open for evil to attack us.
I remind you, it wasn't the "Army of Martin Luther" which saved Europe from the Muslim invasions.
This led me to the Church. In my search, I was also spoon fed by some close friends. Which Church? The one that Christ founded. The one which has been the lamp for the world for two tho thousand years. The one which Christ promised us, the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The one which is riddled with cancerous modernism, liberalism, communism, masonry, satanism, and homosexuality. Why? Because it holds the Truth. Yes it is riddled with Cancer. That doesn't mean it is wrong. It means it is under continuous, devastating attack. People who see only the cancer are not looking at the whole of the body. The Cancer is not the Nature of the Body. It is a Cancer. It can and will be excised. Christ promised it so.
Back to the Hooleh Buy-able...
No, Virginia, the Bible didn't fall from the sky. It was assembled at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. Yes Constantine made the Council happen, but why? If we're going to have a Christian Empire, we must hammer out what we believe. The Council did that and gave is the Creed. The Council also canonized the Bible. Why were some books left out and others included? Well, Virginia, the best minds of the Church at that time did their best, guided by the Holy Spirit, to determine which books were without error and worthy of belief and which were not. By what standard, you ask? By living the creed, by following doctrine as Christ gave it to us, by looking at the teachings of the Church Fathers, the faith of the apostles and martyrs, by adhering to that tradition.
So why was the book of Enoch not included? Why not the Gospel of Thomas? Or the Gospel of Mary Magdalene?
The best minds of the Church looked at all the information available and said, "These books, here, are the ones we can be confident are without error and support Christian Doctrine as Christ himself gave it to us."
The other books were not suppressed. They were not collected and burned. They were not hidden. They were simply set aside.
No, Virginia, the Bible didn't just fall from the sky, whole and complete. And, no Virginia, the Church is NOT based upon the Bible. The Bible exists because of the Church.
So, having been just like SW Richmond, I grew up.
What kind of Christian am I? Not a very good one. I am as fucked-up as the next fellow. I do, however, now have a guiding lamp. I have an example. I have tradition to look to. I have a body of teaching which is two thousand years old and without error. I now believe.
I have said all of the above to say this, in brevity. Without God, without the Church, there is no Law. Without God, without the Church, there is only Man's whim. Then we are back to modernism, liberalism, masonry, communism, homosexuality, etc...
Ronald Turk, Associate Deputy Director of BATFE (herein ATF) has non-published his white paper on Federal regulations of firearms. It was not intended for public distribution, but as things will go sometimes, here it is.
Mr. Turk makes some startling admissions and revelations in this paper. I will discuss some of them here.
In the first paragraph (executive summary), he states that ATF can
"...promote commerce and defend the Second Amendment..."
Huh? ATF, defend the Second Amendment? Thats what he says.
His first point of discussion is about making it easier for people to get an FFL for dealing only at gun shows. He makes the point that ATF has long held that if you buy and sell guns at gun shows you are engaging in business and under the Gun Control Act, must have a License. At the same time, on ATF's FFL application, they ask this question: "Do you intend to do business only at gun shoes?" If you answer in the affirmative, ATF National Licensing Center will deny your application. Now he says,
"...limited or no actual
sales out the business’s front door should not be an issue." and, "... ATF can start
that process while immediately issuing a policy change to the above practice which
would have no negative impact to public safety. In fact, it would encourage more sales
and business through a licensee, including background checks on sales at gun show
events, and likely increase public safety." Again, I ask, "Huh"? Is this the same ATF which, at the direction of the Clinton administration, pressured people into giving up their FFLs, among other reasons, because they were not selling enough guns and therefor didn't "need" an FFL? Or, pressured people to surrender their FFLs because they were being used primarily to enhance a personal collection at a reduced cost? They never pressured the Brady Campaign, of Washington D.C. to surrender their FFL when they never sold a single firearm and indeed, such a business would have been illegal in D.C. at the time. Now they want to encourage the much maligned "kitchen table dealer" to get an FFL? Now they say his activity will enhance actually public safety? Say whah...? In section 2 he talks about armor piercing ammunition and how ATF has been working with the firearms industry to come up with a way to approve of manufacture of what might be considered armor piercing RIFLE ammunition. You see, AP ammo is NOT illegal under federal law. Armor piercing HANDGUN AMMUNITION is illegal. In 1993, ATF, in all their wisdom and concern for public safety, declared that ALL 7.62x39 rifle ammunition which had a steel core was suddenly armor piercing handgun ammo and thus contraband. They did this as importers had millions of dollars worth of that very ammunition on the docks waiting for customs approval or in transit on the ocean. Why did they do that? The excuse they used was because Olympic Arms made a few prototype handguns based on the AR-15 design, which chambered the 7.62x39 cartridge. You see, such ammo was being imported from china for about ten cents per round. Producing such a unique firearm made perfect marketing sense. Despite the fact that federal law defined AP handgun ammo as cartridges designed to be fired from a handgun, thus narrowly defining them and eliminating rifle ammunition from such prohibition, ATF decided on their own that the Commie 7.62 was now a handgun cartridge. Cute huh? Now, Turk says they have been working on a way to loosen up that interpretation, but, shucks by golly, the 5.56mm green tip exemption was part of the deal. Since there was such an uproar about the potential reclassification of green tip M855 as armor piercing handgun ammunition, the whole deal was off. No new rule was published. You think maybe they could have done a good thing with manufacturers while leaving the M855 green tip classification alone? Ya think? Nope, in traditional ATF fashion, they tried to pull a fast one, slicky boy style, hoping they would get away with it. There was too much blowback. Turk says this should be revisited. In section 3 he talks about the reimportation of military firearms which were exported to allies fifty or more years ago. Rifles such as the M1 Carbine and M1 Garand and handguns such as the M1911A1 have been sitting in warehouses in countries like Korea awaiting importation permits. The last effort was made while Madam Clinton was Secretary of State and was scuttled by that department. The Obama administration was hostile to reimportation of Curio and Relic firearms. Their argument was that weapons of war have no place on our "streets" and that since there was no proof that they would not be used in crimes, they shouldn't be reimported. How do you prove a negative? You can't. Gotcha. Turk now tells us that these firearms pose to threat to public safety and that importing them would facilitate collectors and other lawful users. A Deputy Director of ATF saying this? Huh? In section 4 he talks about clearing up section 922o of the law so that variances could more easily be granted to FFL/SOTs. thus facilitating their business in post 86 machine guns. What he doesn't say, and give his other positions I was hoping he would, is that the Hughes Amendment should be repealed. Basically, the NFA says you must register and pay a tax before you can legally own/possess a machine gun. In 1986, Congress passed the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act which made it impossible to register any new machine guns. There was now no way to comply with the law. Gotcha. Here is the link to the video of the voice vote on the Hughes Amendment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxYnxx8cRxg
If Mr. Turk has a new found admiration and respect for the Second Amendment and for lawful gun owners, why wouldn't he advocate for the repeal of the Hughes Amendment? Wishful thinking on my part? Definitely. In section 5 he makes a very practical statement on devices such as the SigBrace. ATF has recently sent out a letter stating that simply putting the SigBrace against your shoulder is a "redisgn" of the firearm, thus making it a short barreled rifle, and requiring an NFA registration and $200 tax paid. Did you get that? It is current ATF policy that simply placing a handgun with a SigBrace against your shoulder is a "redesign", magically turning it into an NFA firearm. Turk reasonably argues that this position should be reversed. Has reason suddenly found a home at ATF? Huh? In section 6 Turk states that ATF's position on the definition of "Sporting Purposes" should be revisited given the modern and ubiquitous use of what we call MSR's. The AR-15 pattern rifle, once maligned and nearly banned into non-existance, has become the most common rifle in America. He wants to redefine "Sporting Purposes" because their definition of that term is twenty years old. A better thing to do would be to advise Congress to eliminate the "Sporting Purposes" clause from the Gun Control Act. In section 7 he advocates for a searchable database of current and previous rulings, available to industry people and ATF personnel alike. This is LONG overdue. As it is, there is no database of rulings, so neither ATF personnel, or members of the regulated industries can be sure of any ruling at any given time. In section 8, Turk addresses suppressors, or "silencers" as they are sometimes known. He advocates the removal of suppressors from the NFA. It is about fucking time someone in ATF said it. They are getting so popular and commonly used that dealing with all the form 1's and form 4's is increasing ATF's workload exponentially. ATF NFA branch is swamped. Getting a tax stamp approved takes 8 months now. All this for a muffler, a simple sound muffler. In recent years, ATF has held the position that any part of a suppressor was a suppressor. If you had nothing more than one K Baffle, or one "wipe", you could be prosecuted. See here and here. This is simply WRONG. A suppressor on the end of my rifle barrel is no more a firearm than the muffler on my truck is an automobile. In section 9 Turk addresses the prohibition on FFLs selling guns outside of their own state. As it is now, an FFL may sell guns ONLY within the State in which he is licensed. Lets say a Licensed dealer has a retail store in... Texarkana, Tx. He can sell guns on the Texas side of town, but if he crosses State Line Blvd. to attend a weekend gun show on the Arkansas side and takes some of his inventory with him, he can ONLY take orders and return home at the end of the show with his inventory. Hopefully, some of his customers will come see him across town on Monday. If he sells one gun on the Arkansas side of town, he is in violation of federal law and risks having his FFL revoked and being prosecuted. Turk advocates a revision to allow FFLs to sell guns interstate as long as the law in each state is complied with and all other federal laws, such as the Brady act are followed. Again, it is about time. In section 10 he addresses Destructive Devices. Just about all his advocacy is toward making it easier for industry members to interact with the military and other industry members. In sections 11 and 12, he discusses ATF's famous Demand Letters. The most recent of which demanded that dealers in Southern Border States report multiple rifle sales to ATF National Tracing Center. He thinks it is a swell idea. he doesn't address the FACT that ATF's Fast and Furious gun smuggling program was the cause and the reason for the demand letters. He should be reminded of this by members of Congress if they should ever take up any of his recommendations. In section 13 he addresses ATF's requirement that FFLs keep their records for at least twenty years. He says that some in ATF think that dealers should be required to keep records forever. The idea being that "time to crime" is sometimes longer than twenty years for crime guns. As it is, dealers keep tens of thousands, sometimes hundreds of thousands of 4473s in boxes at their business location. I would argue that keeping records more than ten years old is not conducive to "reducing violent crime through enforcement of the gun control act". In section 15 he addresses the need for a confirmed permanent Director. Could this be why he is advocating for all these changes? Perhaps he has his eye on the job? I don't know. It may be. I think Turk is to be congratulated on his foresight. It seems he realizes that the gun CONTROLLERS, have lost the argument. He might realize the new administration is not so friendly to the control agenda and program as the last administration was. He seems to see the writing on the wall after Heller and McDonald and understands that if ATF survives as an agency, its mission will be much streamlined from what it has historically been. I would remind Mr. Turk, that it was his agency's doings at Ruby Ridge and Waco specifically, and the AWB during the Clinton administration, which caused the gun culture to blossom and mushroom. Are better days ahead for firearms enthusiasts? I believe so. I think some in ATF, in spite of themselves, can see it also.
The FICTION "that because it was an excise tax, it was legal" (lawful) IS NOT TRUE. The power of the Federal Government is limited to its own property as stated in Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 17, and to "regulate Commerce with FOREIGN NATIONS, and among the "several" States, and with the Indian tribes;" as stated in Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3, 18 USC, Section 921, Definitions, states," The term 'interstate or foreign commerce' INCLUDES commerce between any place in a State and any place outside of that State, or within any POSSESSION of the United States ( not INCLUDING the Canal Zone) or the District of Columbia, but such term DOES NOT INCLUDE commerce between places within the same State, but through any place outside of that State. The term 'State' INCLUDES the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the possessions of the United States (not INCLUDING the Canal Zone)." Only EMPLOYEES of the federal government, RESIDENTS of the District of Columbia, RESIDENTS of naval bases RESIDENTS of forts, U.S. Citizens of the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Territories, and insular possessions were lawfully required to file and pay the Victory Tax.
Remember, they are proud of themselves.
The State says, the cops is always right. If it was the cops what dunnit, it was the right thing to do, because it was the cops what dunnit. Why? Because the cops is always right. The cops is tools of the State and YOU ain't the State. Who says so? The State! Now, bend over and spread'em!
image found on Google
The fourth circuit court of appeals has declared that since you have decided to carry a gun, you categorically are a danger to yourself and others.
Do you understand that? The Government is saying that the exercise of a secured right makes you a danger to the Government. All government agents can treat you as such at their whim.
This quote from the concurring opinion shows the Court's mindset:
In sum, individuals who carry firearms — lawfully or unlawfully — pose a risk of danger to themselves, law enforcement officers, and the public at large. So, you are not the State. The State is the State and you are a danger to the State. Who is the State? Those who wear badges and those who wear robes are the State and YOU are a danger to them. Do you get it? One more question, and you will pardon me for being, uh, logical... Are armed Policemen a danger to the millions and millions of "the people" who are not the State? Should I view every encounter with a policeman as a situation where my life is in mortal danger? If so, I should be able to disarm a Policeman, any policeman, anytime I experience an adverse emotional state, and force him to prove to me he has the authority to go around in State costume and carry a gun, using the Court's definition, at a danger to himself and others. Right? I can hear the refrain now. "Why don't you just go ahead and submit and comply?" Yeah, that is just what FREE MEN do.
I know there are some policemen who read this blog. So, policemen, you say that YOU don't think this way? You say that YOU don't necessarily agree with this mindset?
They why don't we hear your voice opposing this crap? Why don't we hear you individually and through your professional organizations? Why are't you shouting from the roof tops, slingin in spit and blowin snot bubbles, that YOU and your brethren oppose the encroaching Police State?