Video Creator’s Channel BlazeTV
You Know Im Not Surprised That Considering The
president and his executive fiats, but using the Department of Justice to do an inrun around Congress to infor to implement his gun control agenda that he wasn’t able to do through Congress, How can the DoJ do this and and what’s more why is no one in the administration or anyone in Washington DC saying well. The Doj doesn’t make law they are just there to enforce what’s already written and hand out legal decisions on this where where do we go with this well your last question the reason nobody at Doj is doing that is because they don’t like guns. I mean most of the people who work at the Justice department in downtown DC. It’s called the RFK building remember there’s a beltway culture. A lot of them come from Maryland, Chevy Chase Silver Spring Tacoma Park, Alexandria.
Theres A Culture Inside The Beltway That Is
hostile to first amen second amendment rights and so the reason nobody’s protesting is because they don’t like guns now your first question how can they just make law how are they doing this? Don’t forget the atf. The bureau of Alcohol tobacco and firearms falls under the Justice Department and the AtF is responsible for various federal databases regarding criminal conviction. They’re feeding data into statewide verification checks so when you go buy a firearm. Ultimately they’re peering into federal data and if that federal data are showing that somebody has a mental problem or a psychiatric history of treatment. The federal government gets to manipulate the data they get to decide what the data show Yeah and that’s when what’s disturbing is that we’ve known that we’ve seen how this is used against veterans and then most recently, with the New York Safe Act were actually the largest number at once.
34 000 People Just Immediately Like That
rendered ineligible to exercise their second amendment rights because they had just sought some mental health mental wellness visits with a psychologist or something in the past year and that to me Christian is is I find that incredibly scary because they’re using such a blanket term. I mean just because someone maybe has depression or someone has Pts that that’s an assumed danger not a real one Yeah and look I have experience with real danger with mental patients and mental people getting firearms and we don’t want paranoid schizophrenics. to own guns period because they kill people. This is a question though not about paranoid schizophrenics, but this is a question about people who go see counseling. Maybe they have flashbacks from a combat experience.
Something Like That The Government Is Using Any
chance they can to get these people on the do not sell list cannot buy list because Don’t forget this government fears veterans we’ve seen it coming out of DHs Department of Homeland Security issuing their right wing domestic terror reports that focuses on veterans. This is an integrated program. Dana to limit second amendment rights and the other rule because they always say that they’re going to come up with regulations that are always incredibly vague about it. And these are really the only two more concrete things that we know and the other one was the atf. They’re wanting the atf to modify this.
Rule About Misdemeanor Domestic Assault Which You Know
I’m all for because I and with my family experience that I’ve outlined in my book. I mean it was an estranged family member that had been assaulting his his estranged wife that could have taken us all out. So I’m all fine with a domestic abuser not having being able to obtain a firearm, but the problem that I see with them wanting to redefine. This is that they want to use a blanket term instead of defining it case by case. So I gave the example that if you have a woman in her house who has her estranged husband or her abusive husband in her face.
Screaming At Her And She Shoves Him.
He tells the cops she shoves him that right there could be domestic misdemeanor domestic assault and she could be rendered and eligible to get a. firearm to defend herself? I mean what’s give us the problem you know from from your legal perspective with what they’re wanting the AtF to do in the modification of this role well the biggest problem is the constitution. Don’t forget the states have the power to deal with this issue. I was just looking recently at some Pennsylvania rules on ineligibility to possess a firearm and the states have their own regime.
- guns question just make law
- dc saying doj doesn make
- congress doj administration
- congress doj administration washington
- reason protesting don like guns
The States Have Their Own Rules And
that’s the way under our constitution. It ought to be, but having bureaucrats in Washington deciding what sort of misdemeanor might render you and eligible to purchase a firearm is exactly the wrong way to do it. It’s exactly the anti-constitutional way to do it because people cannot overestimate the radical nature of the culture inside the beltway in Washington, DC.
The president is using the Department of Justice to do an inrun around Congress to implement his gun control agenda that he wasn’t able to do through Congress, How can the DoJ do this and why is no one in the administration or anyone in Washington DC saying well.& The DoJ doesn’t make law they are just there to enforce what’s already written and hand out legal decisions on this where do we go with this? The reason nobody at Doj is doing that is because they don’t like guns. There’s a beltway culture inside the beltway that is hostile to first amen second amendment rights . The federal government gets to manipulate the data they get to decide what the data show . The New York Safe Act was actually the largest number at once . 34 000 people just immediately like that rendered ineligible to exercise their second amendment right because they had just sought some mental health mental wellness visits with a psychologist or someth the New York safe Act were actually the biggest number atOnce ….. Click here to read more and watch the full video