Jan.1, Guns May Be Seized By Authorities W/Out Notice. Happy New "Enslavement" Year

As with all the Nanny Governments past ploys, California is again being used as a test bed for more and harsher restrictions. Remember where the Gasoline changes started? Remember where the Air Pollution Standards started? Remember where the Environmental Laws got Started? Remember where just about every Progressive restriction got started?

Well, it's happening again, and this time it's going to affect our Second Amendment to the point that it may as well not even be there. Starting Jan.1, 2016 a California "Gun Safety Law" will go into effect that gives Judges the right to arbitrarily confiscate a persons guns if the Judge decides there's a "Potential For Violence" That's all it takes, No 'Guidelines' nor 'Burden of Proof' required or mentioned.

A.B. 1014, which was introduced last year by Assembly members Das Williams (D-Carpinteria) and Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), allows a court to issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order and a firearm seizure warrant based on the “recent acquisition of firearms or other deadly weapons“ or the “reckless use, display, or brandishing” of firearms even if no crime has been committed.

The bill “would authorize any member of the general public” – including “a disgruntled neighbor, a former employee, an ex-girlfriend, or any other scorned or vindictive individual” - to file a ‘gun violence restraining order’ against “someone they ‘think’ shouldn’t have a firearm,” the NRA said in a letter to committee members.

In addition to evidence of threats or acts of violence, the bill would also allow a judge to consider a gun owner’s past non-violent convictions when issuing a secret seizure warrant, the NRA pointed out.

In the case of A.B. 1014, however, “law enforcement officers will be entering the homes of law-abiding individuals with guns drawn and orders to seize all firearms in sight,” .

“The idea that police officers will be legally obligated to treat citizens who in many cases aren’t even accused of a crime as dangerous, armed individuals is a new and disturbing innovation in the law,”

Bear in mind that California has some of the most draconian gun laws on the books in America, and then extrapolate out to what Obama has flatly stated he will be doing with executive actions. What better way around Congress and more so the will of the majority of the people?

This may be the future of American Citizens when the Progressive Oligarchy becomes the rule of the land.“The idea that police officers will be legally obligated to treat citizens who in many cases aren’t even accused of a crime as dangerous, armed individuals is a new and disturbing innovation in the law,” That is the most chilling Statist/Progressive pronouncement and agenda ever seen in America. This is the beginning of our return to enslavement by a "Ruling Class" of Pseudo Monarchy.

What ever happened to the american Legal Standard that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty? The Onus of Proof has descended on the People to prove their innocence when the State presumes them guilty. That is how all the Communist Dictatorships treat their subjects.

Tuesdays results from the CNN/ORC polls show most Americans oppose Obama and the gun grabbers on stricter gun laws and disapprove of Obama's handling of the gun control issue. Remember back in Feb 2015 when Obama tried to get the BATFE to ban 5.56 - M 855 ammo? Thank God this man will be gone in just over a year from now. Lets pray that he will be stopped from doing even more damage to us until then.

In my considered opinion, it's time for the Citizens of this Country to Unite and take back what has been usurped from us by Repealing the 14th,16th and 17th Amendments and flip the power flow back to what the Founders intended it to be. Lets face it squarely, these three Amendments have been the impetus that has placed us at this point with our Government dictating to us instead of being responsible to us.

Some may argue that the 14th should stay because it guarantees citizenship and voting rights. The 15th Guarantees voting rights, and the 1866 Civil Rights act defines citizenship. While the 14th has been used to further many arguments like the Anchor Baby rule for which it was not intended. I cite; Senator Jacob Howard, a contemporary of the time period when the 14th was ratified, and spelled out the beliefs of Congress at that time of the intent of that 14th Amendment.

He stated; "Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."

This understanding was further reaffirmed by Senator Edward Cowan from the same time period who stated;"[A foreigner in the United States] has a right to the protection of the laws; but he is not a citizen in the ordinary acceptance of the word..."

Look at it like this; The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

Source for the preceding statements; http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent....