Previous Next Clell Asher@clellbuddy 10h10 hours ago Replying to @AmyMek pic.twitter.com/axCy5QV02K 1 reply 8 retweets 17 likes
Another reminder why "Red Flag" laws are a threat to your liberty. Constitutional Freedoms An 84-Year-Old Crossing Guard and Veteran Is Fired and His Guns Seized, All Because of a Misunderstanding Former police officer and Korean War-era vet is canned after a waitress reported him to police By Wayne Dupree October 14, 2019 An 84-year-old former police officer and Korean War-era veteran who was working as a school crossing guard was fired and had his guns confiscated. Advertisement This happened after a waitress overheard parts of a conversation he was having with a friend at a diner and misunderstood them. Stephen Nichols of Tisbury — in the Martha’s Vineyard area of Massachusetts — got the job as a crossing guard because he loves kids. After his wife passed away, he reportedly needed something to occupy his time and his heart. While he was at a local diner, Nichols was speaking to a friend about a school resource officer who apparently was constantly leaving his post to go for coffee in the morning. Nichols said he was worried somebody would come in and “shoot up the school” while the officer was out on one of his coffee runs. That’s the part of the conversation the waitress overheard — which she reported to the police. That’s right. She heard, or thought she heard, him say something about a “school shooting.” Now, the man has lost his job — and his guns and gun license were seized under red flag laws. Here’s how The Martha’s Vineyard Times explained it: “Nichols said the waitress made a complaint to Tisbury Police about what she overheard and on the strength of that, [Police Chief Mark] Saloio and another officer relieved Nichols of his crossing guard duties while he was in the midst of performing them and subsequently drove to his home and took away his firearms license and guns.” “’He came up and told me what I said was a felony but he wasn’t going to charge me,’ Nichols said of Saloio,” the outlet reported. Nichols told the publication he’s been licensed for firearms since 1958. He also said that “he didn’t receive any paperwork or receipts for the seizure of his guns.” In a long interview, Nichols told The MV Times about his concern for Tisbury School: “When I was in the United States Army — and it wasn’t just me, it’s anybody who’s in the United States service — if you are on guard duty for eight hours, you didn’t leave that position. And I’m just so accustomed to that … [So] when I see someone who’s supposed to be protecting kids leave the school unguarded — if you’re on guard duty, you stay there.” Tisbury School Principal John Custer told The MV Times he was familiar with Nichols. He said crossing guards are “hired, trained and scheduled entirely by the police department.” The friend who was speaking with Stephen Nichols at the diner said at no time did Nichols make a threat of any kind and said this whole thing is “absurd.” Nichols, instead, was actually expressing concern for children’s safety — and now he’s been canned and his life’s work as a police officer has been disrespected. The 84-year-old Nichols told The Martha Vineyard Times he’s never been accused of threatening a school and never had a firearms violation. “I’ve got no record of any violations,” he said. Nichols also said he has 11 grandchildren and 11 great grandchildren. “I would never, ever, ever, harm a child,” he told The MV Times. I’ve seen a lot of really disturbing red flag stories over the past couple months — but this one takes the cake. I hope and pray Mr. Nichols gets his job back and his guns, too. I also hope he receives an apology from the people who have disrespected him. This is a case, in my view, that should go all the way to the Supreme Court to challenge the legitimacy of red flag laws. A version of this piece originally appeared in WayneDupree.com; this article is used by permission. https://www.lifezette.com/2019/10/84-year-old-crossing-guard-veteran-fired/
So warren is promising to do what exactly? Infringe the First Amendment rights of a civil rights organization that she opposes? Sounds like the kind of thing a president should get impeached for.
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2019-11-06.html#read_more ... . The most clear-cut evidence that Democrats do not care about democracy is Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recent decision to halt the death penalty (unless administered by an illegal alien, as in the case of Kate Steinle). I doubt any other state’s voters have been more emphatic about their support for the death penalty than Californians, voting for it in statewide initiatives in 1972, 1978, 2012 and again in 2016 -- just three years ago. But earlier this year, Gov. Newsom flagrantly disregarded the voters’ repeated endorsement of capital sentences and single-handedly imposed a moratorium on the death penalty. Forget Facebook ads. Who cares if Russians hack into our voting machines and change the vote totals? Democrats are going to ignore the results anyway. Their vaunted concern for the sanctity of our elections is so much horse crap. It’s the same with guns. This September, during a fiery debate on guns, the left demanded “red-flag laws” to take guns away from citizens after having their politics, their writings, their previous exercise of free speech examined on a granular level by bureaucrats empowered to revise the Bill of Rights. In the middle of that debate, Gov. Newsom commuted the sentences of 21 convicted felons -- almost all of whom were serving lengthy terms for murder or attempted murder with a gun. And get this: Newsom specifically cited the unfairness of enhancing a criminal’s sentence merely because he used a gun when committing a crime. Innocent people walking the street right now -- playing basketball, eating at vegan restaurants, going bowling -- better enjoy themselves. Some number of them will soon have their lives snuffed out because of the governor’s willful decision to begin the process of releasing people who have already committed violence with guns. Liberals don’t care about guns in the hands of violent criminals. They’re coming after the guns of conservatives. We’re horrified by people who commit violence with firearms. They're horrified by people who haven’t committed any violence and never will -- but who engage in speech displeasing to Democrats. Like a magician revealing his trick, the governor of California provided the proof, making it absolutely clear that Democrats don’t give a fig for democracy and aren’t disturbed in the slightest by gun violence. COPYRIGHT 2019 ANN COULTER
Nope. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7725407/Dead-Texas-caregiver-attacked-killed-wild-hogs.html
Mexico has ONE gun store in the entire country and it is virtually impossible for the average Mexican to own a gun legally. One could easily argue that the whole country is a "gun free zone". In 2018 nearly 30,000 people were murdered in Mexico, countless others wounded in crimes committed with guns. Guess more than a few people don't really give a fuck about the law. Those people are called criminals and they're not just going to magically disappear because some new law gets passed.
%% Mexico allows shotguns to be imported for hunting by US citizens, but to much red tape for me. Argentina+ Uruguay is someWhat the same, but much less corruption, bribes; + much better game populations. The Mexican border signs noting ''Illegal To Carry FireArms , Ammo; Penalty= Prision'' -that IS a trainwreck so to speak.=============================================================================================
Sanctuary Cities: A Battle Over the Second Amendment is Unfolding Across America https://themindunleashed.com/2020/01/battle-over-second-amendment-sanctuary-cities.html