Gun Confiscation has begun

                                                      Gun Confiscation Has Begun

                                                            UN small arms treaty

Inch by inch it is a cinch. The journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. Many planners realize that nothing monumental is quickly achieved and dogged persistence over time is needed to overcome obstacles in the pursuit of a valued goal.

Nobody has utilized the principle of incrementalism better than the globalists in the pursuit of their goals related to the establishment of the New World Order. Obama is driving up our energy costs by shutting down power plants, one at a time. Obama has helped the managed healthcare companies finally rid themselves of dealing with the


The UN, the force behind all evil

Gun Confiscation has begun. In two different geographical locations in two differing countries, the authorities have confiscated guns without probable cause or the exigent circumstances required by constitutional law. But alas, I almost forgot, there is no rule of law in the United States. There is not one amendment in the Constitution that has been left intact.

Can there be any doubt that the United Nations is behind these gun grabs? How do we know that the United Nations behind this beta test related disarming of private citizens? Read about the United Nations intent to control all guns here. I implore that all of you heed this warning and use it as a guiding principle in the months and years ahead. The United Nations is the enemy of humanity. I have this rogue organization, which is controlled by mafia bankers, in my sights and am planning to expose their anti-humanist agenda to all that will listen with an open mind. The United Nations is behind national health care which is going to bankrupt millions in this country, or result in the early demise of millions of people through treatment exclusions and denial of care. The UN (UNESCO) is behind the sabotaging of the American education system in such ill-conceived programs as No Child Left Behind and now Common Core. And the United Nations seeks to disarm all citizens prior to enacting their planned nightmarish tyranny upon the world. Listen to me America, the United Nations is your mortal enemy!

Tyrants Always Seize the Guns Before Subjugating the People

We all know that the American Revolution commenced with British troops marching on Lexington and Concord in order to seize the arms of the colonial resistance to the tyranny of King George. The British were soundly defeated as the colonists vigorously defended their only means available to stand up to the British.

Let the record show that upon this moment, history is indeed repeating itself as the UN backed ideology is rearing its ugly head and attempting to disarm citizens without using due process of law.

Lexington, Canada

Floodwaters prompted the evacuation of 13,000 residents in a small Canadian town. Following the evacuation, the authorities took it upon themselves to rummage through the personal possessions of the local residents and seize all the guns they could find.

The 13,000 residents of High River, Alberta, are still waiting for the authorities’ permission to return to their homes. Dozens of High River residents have actively confronted the Royal Canadian Mounted Police at a checkpoint at the edge of their small town since floodwaters prompted a forced evacuation last week. The RCMP have posted private guards on trails leading to the town. They have placed spike strips on the roads leading into town. Apparently, the RCMP authorities are not done looting the possessions of their citizens.

This is the Lexington moment in world events. As was the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing, so too, is the first of the beta tests for UN inspired gun confiscation.

Concord, Arizona

 Arizona is experiencing a Concord event. And as you will witness, that this time, the patriots at Lexington (High River, Canada) and at Concord have failed (Arizona) and the tyrants have won.

“If a law enforcement officer contacts a person who is in possession of a firearm, the law enforcement officer may take temporary custody of the firearm for the duration of that contact.” -13-3102 Section K, Arizona Law.http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/13/03102.htm

Under the law, there does not have to be any suspicion of wrongdoing. The seizing of the guns does not have to be in any way connected to a criminal investigation and the period of time that the police can confiscate guns is not specified under the law. This is the legalized public theft of private property and an egregious violation of the Second Amendment.

An Arizona court of appeals has upheld the law. According to CBS 5,http://www.kpho.com/story/22974979/arizona-ruling-says-police-can-temporarily-take-guns in Arizona, one dissenting judge argued that Arizona police can only confiscate guns if there is investigative cause or suspicion of criminal activity. Even the dissenting opinion does not go far enough. Under the Constitution, Americans cannot be deprived of property without due process of law. This ruling effectively gives the police on the street the power of judge, jury and executioner. This is a clear separation of powers issues that the courts failed to address.

Beyond the immediacy of this outrageous ruling, lies the implications. Both the Canadian and the Arizona cases of gun confiscation speaks to a much larger and more sinister agenda.

Gun Confiscation is a Bad Omen for Any People
History clearly demonstrates that widespread gun confiscation, in any form, is an ominous sign for any country. The following is a brief synopsis of gun control.

1. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves against their ethnic-cleansing government, were arrested and exterminated.

2. In 1929, the former Soviet Union established gun control as a means of controlling the “more difficult” of their citizens. From 1929 to the death of Stalin, 40 million Soviets met an untimely end at the hand of various governmental agencies as they were arrested and exterminated.

3. After the rise of the Nazi’s, Germany established their version of gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves against the “Brown Shirts”, were arrested and exterminated. Interestingly, the Brown Shirts were eventually targeted for extermination themselves following their blind acts of allegiance to Hitler. Any American military and police would be wise to grasp the historical significance of the Brown Shirts’ fate.

4. After Communist China established gun control in 1935, an estimated 50 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves against their fascist leaders, were arrested and exterminated.

5. Closer to home, Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayans, unable to defend themselves against their ruthless dictatorship, were arrested and exterminated.

6. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves from their dictatorial government, were arrested and exterminated.

7. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million of the “educated” people, unable to defend themselves against their fascist government, were arrested and exterminated.

8. In 1994, Rwanda disarmed the Tutsi people and being unable to defend themselves from their totalitarian government, nearly one million were summarily executed.

The total numbers of victims who lost their lives because of gun control is approximately 70 million people in the 20th century.http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm The historical voices from 70 million corpses speak loudly and clearly to those Americans who are advocating for a de facto gun ban. Governments murdered four times as many civilians as were killed in all the international and domestic wars combined. Governments murdered millions more people than were killed by common criminals and it all followed gun control.http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm

Conclusion

I would remind the reader that gun confiscation is not an end unto itself. It is a means to an end. For when the people are finally disarmed, the banking mafia that runs this country can have their way with this country with very little opposition. And if that ever happens, you will soon learn why the NSA is engaged in massive data base collections of your communications. This Sunday evening, on my talk show, I am interviewing someone who worked for DARPA at Arizona State University and he knows about the threat matrix scores which are being assigned to individuals and groups. This is real and yet, our people continue to remain in a slumber as the eye of the storm approaches.

At what point does or America, and for that matter, the people of the world decide that they have had enough of the banker inspired tyranny which has hijacked almost every nation on the planet through central banking?

Inch by inch the globalist bankers have been imposing their brand of tyranny. They are not at the gate, they are inside your home, inside your computer, inside your cell phone, inside your car and even inside your bedroom.

If there ever was going to be a tipping point, isn’t this it?


A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution. The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down a person cannot be compelled ‘to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the Constitution.’ ” ~~ MURDOCK V. PENNSYLVANIA 319 US 105 (1942)

Here is some constitutional law info for you. Also, about illegal gun confiscation in NY and California. See below.
No one follows the Constitution, except when a government official says, the “RULE OF LAW”. That is a big joke. What is the Rule of Law? The Constitution is the Rule of Law, so why not OBEY it.

FBI reports, there is 1,400,000 gang members in the USA, and they commit 80% of the crimes. So why not finger print, photograph, and register them. Make them get a permit to own and or carry a gun. But no, just the honest people have to, the criminal is exempt.
Real Smart Legislators.

COURTS DO NOT FALLOW THE “RULE OF LAW”, THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

Edwin Vieira, Jr. — A Primer on “Martial Law” <<<< A VERY GOOD LEGAL WEB

http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin198

http://www.Teamlaw.org <<< A good legal web. Look at Land Patents

Sui Juris – Brief In Support Of Notice For Dismissal For Lack Of Jurisdiction

http://www.barefootsworld.net/sui_juris/right_to_travel.htm <<<< A lot of legal info on this web.

The History of Gun Control – FULL LENGTH – YouTube VERY GOOD REAL INFO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pKasF6l3y0

Unconstitutional Official Acts 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it…..
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.
No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
Jon Roland:

Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a "law", and should not be called a "law", even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.
All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one's life.
Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law.

27.1 Bouvier's Law Dictionary defines;
27.1.1 Property — The ownership of property implies its use in the prosecution of any legitimate business which is not a nuisance in itself. See: In re Hong Wah, 82 Fed. 623.
28. The United States Supreme Court states:
28.1 The Federal Constitution and laws passed within its authority are by the express terms of that instrument made the supreme law of the land. The Fourteenth Amendment protects life, liberty, and property from invasion by the States without due process of law.
28.2 Property is more than the mere thing which a person owns. It is elementary that it includes the "RIGHT" to acquire, use and dispose of it. (Emphasis added). See: Buchanan v. Warley 245 U.S. 60, 74.

It is a felony and federal crime to violate or deprive citizens of their Constitutionally protected rights.

Court Defense #010D

http://www.godsfirstwitness.com/midnight_cry/10d_CourtDefense.html‎
Arizone, 384 US 436, 491. CASE #9: "The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. Us, 230 F 486, at 489.

Driver Licensing vs. Right to Travel – TLP – The Lawful Path
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/DLbrief.shtml‎
II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135. and further … "Personal …. Who better to enlighten us than Justice Tolman of the Supreme Court of ….. One of the most famous and perhaps the most quoted definitions of due process of law, …

Real Law v. FAKE LAW
worldwidelocals.webs.com/
A U.S. Supreme Court Decision that has not been overruled. …. II Am. Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135. Since this is a right, and a … that era, is a 35 page section section on Real Law, written in very simplistic language, telling and …
More results for american jurisprudence constitutional law section 329 page 1135 quoting the us supreme court
Rule 12 Motion. No Driver License is needed to drive.
thelawyerdude.com/www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/6147.html
This 40 page brief argues that a driver license is an intrusion and an encroachment on our freedom. … [emphasis added] American Jurisprudence 1st. … Table #1 U.S. Supreme Court cases cited herein: … Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135 “The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his …
More results for American jurisprudence constitutional law section 329 page 1135 quoting the us supreme court

PEOPLE COULD SUE EACH POLICE OFFICER UNDER RICO, WHO HAS COME TO THE DOOR AND MADE THE PEOPLE GIVE THEM THEIR (PROPERTY) GUNS WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. 20YRS AND NO STATUE OF LIMITATION. SAME WITH NEW YORK.
"NUREMBERG TRIALS" NO EXCUSE, THAT THE COPS WOULD SAY: "WE WERE ORDERED TO CONFISCATE PEOPLES GUN".

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday signed legislation aimed at taking handguns and assault rifles away from 20,000 Californians who acquired them legally but have since been disqualified from ownership because of a criminal conviction or serious mental illness.

The Fifth Amendment provides that private property shall not be taken without just compensation.

The Fourteenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution reads:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Due process dose not give the State of California the right to take property (firearms) by just saying gimme gimme. The State must prove a person is a criminal or mentally ill. That is not done by walking up to some person's home and say gimme gimme, because we say you are a criminal or mentally ill.

Due process is done through the courts, and if proven correct then and only then. does the person have to give up their property and paid for it at the value of the property.

By taking the property in the way they have been doing, it might come under the Rico or Hobbs law & Sec. 241 & 242 USC.

RICO — Hobbs Act Predicate Requires Proof that Defendant
http://www.josephnyc.com/blog/?blogID=1982‎

Jan 31, 2012 – RICO — Hobbs Act Predicate Requires Proof that Defendant Deprived Victim of Property Valuable in Defendants' Hands — Circuit Split as to

Chapter 13 – Civil Rights (112-90) – U.S. Code
uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C13.txt‎
… RIGHTS -MISC1- Sec. 241. Conspiracy against rights. 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law. 243. … -End- -CITE- 18 USC Sec. 241 01/03/2012 (112-90) …

The same crap is being done with a no-fly list. Some person has to put you on a no-fly list and that person is libel for a big lawsuit, if you can prove that they should not have been put on it. This is a big civil rights violation, just like the State of California taking property from citizens without Due Process. A person would have to sue the TSA person who would not let you fly. Then would have get the info from them, of whom told them you could no fly, then sue them for civil rights violations.