Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

🚨 Virginia’s new gun bills criminalize lawful gun owners — while easing penalties for violent crime Under SB 749, many commonly owned firearms would be reclassified as “assault firearms” based on features like a pistol grip, threaded barrel, folding stock, or detachable magazine. What that means in practice: •...

JakeCan72's profile picture

Jake

127,715 subscribers

20,097 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & PolitikGesundheit & WellnessBildung
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

A man from Bangladesh introduced bill SB749 and got passed, a very extensive gun ban bill in Virginia It’s headed to the governor’s desk to be signed, she’s expected to sign it “Some guy from Bangladesh just banned American citizens from owning firearms in Virginia. Saddam Azlan Salim, a state senator in Virginia, has crafted SB749 banning all types of the possession, sale, etc, of firearms. It has passed the legislation. It's going to the governor's desk, a hardcore leftist, and will most likely sign it. Saddam wasn't born in our country. He came here like five minutes ago in the year 2000, and he does not celebrate our history and our constitution — We have to stop the foreign invasion of our country with people who do not celebrate American ideals.“ The bill It prohibits the import, manufacture, sale, purchase, or transfer of defined “assault firearms” (e.g., semi-automatic rifles, pistols, or shotguns with features like folding stocks, pistol grips, threaded barrels for suppressors, or fixed magazines over 10 rounds) and “large capacity ammunition feeding devices” (magazines holding more than 15 rounds).
1:06

A man from Bangladesh introduced bill SB749 and got passed, a very extensive gun ban bill in Virginia It’s headed to the governor’s desk to be signed, she’s expected to sign it “Some guy from Bangladesh just banned American citizens from owning firearms in Virginia. Saddam Azlan Salim, a state senator in Virginia, has crafted SB749 banning all types of the possession, sale, etc, of firearms. It has passed the legislation. It's going to the governor's desk, a hardcore leftist, and will most likely sign it. Saddam wasn't born in our country. He came here like five minutes ago in the year 2000, and he does not celebrate our history and our constitution — We have to stop the foreign invasion of our country with people who do not celebrate American ideals.“ The bill It prohibits the import, manufacture, sale, purchase, or transfer of defined “assault firearms” (e.g., semi-automatic rifles, pistols, or shotguns with features like folding stocks, pistol grips, threaded barrels for suppressors, or fixed magazines over 10 rounds) and “large capacity ammunition feeding devices” (magazines holding more than 15 rounds).

Wall Street Apes

971,891 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Virginia passed a new gun ban — and now some of the very prosecutors expected to enforce it are saying no. The law makes it a misdemeanor to buy, sell, transfer, import, or manufacture certain “assault firearms,” punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,500 fine. That means a rifle that was legal on June 30th became a crime on July 1st because politicians moved a line on paper. But at least five Virginia prosecutors have already said they will not enforce the ban, arguing that it violates the Second Amendment. And here’s the poetic part: Virginia Democrats helped protect prosecutorial discretion years ago, meaning the governor and attorney general can complain all they want — but they can’t force those prosecutors to bring charges. They built the off-switch. Now it’s being used on their own gun ban. This is a win, but it’s not the end. The law is still on the books statewide, and the real fight is in court. With more than 20 million AR-15s in America and the rifle clearly in common use, this is exactly the kind of case the Supreme Court needs to stop ducking. Virginia tried to criminalize law-abiding gun owners. Their own prosecutors said no. Shop the “America” hat at:
2:20

Virginia passed a new gun ban — and now some of the very prosecutors expected to enforce it are saying no. The law makes it a misdemeanor to buy, sell, transfer, import, or manufacture certain “assault firearms,” punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,500 fine. That means a rifle that was legal on June 30th became a crime on July 1st because politicians moved a line on paper. But at least five Virginia prosecutors have already said they will not enforce the ban, arguing that it violates the Second Amendment. And here’s the poetic part: Virginia Democrats helped protect prosecutorial discretion years ago, meaning the governor and attorney general can complain all they want — but they can’t force those prosecutors to bring charges. They built the off-switch. Now it’s being used on their own gun ban. This is a win, but it’s not the end. The law is still on the books statewide, and the real fight is in court. With more than 20 million AR-15s in America and the rifle clearly in common use, this is exactly the kind of case the Supreme Court needs to stop ducking. Virginia tried to criminalize law-abiding gun owners. Their own prosecutors said no. Shop the “America” hat at:

Colion Noir

39,910 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

WATCH: Public Safety Canada has announced that 179 more firearm models have been prohibited as of today, but have not shared a list of the affected firearms publicly. The firearms banned today are "semi-automatic firearms with sustained rapid fire capability" according to Associate Public Safety Minister Rachel Bendayan. We will share a list of these newly prohibited firearms with you as soon as it is made publicly available. The SKS The popular SKS rifle seems to have avoided the ban list once again but was used as an example of why there is a need for a "comprehensive review of the firearms classification regime" in Canada. Bendayan acknowledged that "we now have one of most complex systems of firearms classification in the world" and that this "creates challenges for lawful gun owners, who deserve certainty". The irony of these statements is unprecedented. RCMP Official D/Commr Bryan Larkin, on behalf of CommrRCMPGRC, stated in response to a question from the media that the gun buyback program for individuals will be rolled out in mid-June in regions under RCMP jurisdiction. Assoc. Min. Bendayan also made sure to "reassure" Canadian hunters in particular that even after all the government's prohibitions (including today's) that there are "still over 19,000 unique makes and models of non-restricted firearms available for hunting and sport shooting". Magazine Restrictions New magazine regulations are also in the works in order to "implement measures necessary to limit high capacity magazines". These new regulations are supposed to be presented in the "coming weeks". The draft regulations tabled in December on the Firearms Reference Table (commonly referred to as the FRT) will be strengthened so that "manufacturers and importers will have to wait for the completion of a technical assessment and obtain a reference number before new firearms can enter the Canadian market". Domestic and Gender-based Violence On the domestic and gender based violence front, the government is moving forward on implementing Bill C-21 regulations. Individuals who are convicted of an offence during which violence was used, threatened or attempted or against their partner or any member of their family will be unable to obtain a firearms licence. Any application for a licence must be refused for these individuals. Firearms licences will also be revoked if authorities have grounds to suspect that any acts of domestic violence or stalking is taking place. Red flag measures will also be used to "temporarily suspend a firearms licence if there are reasonable motives to believe the person should no longer have a licence". City of Winnipeg Bendayan also announced that the City of Winnipeg has just signed a contribution agreement "to participate in the [buyback] program fully". As the press were moderating this announcement, the hand-picked anti-gun lobbyists that the Liberals had trotted out were not given the opportunity to speak, due to how late the press conference started (a very consistent pattern with these announcements). With a new leader being announced Sunday, the Liberals are desperate to complete their attack on legal gun owners. Comment on Youtube: #cdnpoli #guncontrol #canada #firearmrights #TeamCCFR
21:51

WATCH: Public Safety Canada has announced that 179 more firearm models have been prohibited as of today, but have not shared a list of the affected firearms publicly. The firearms banned today are "semi-automatic firearms with sustained rapid fire capability" according to Associate Public Safety Minister Rachel Bendayan. We will share a list of these newly prohibited firearms with you as soon as it is made publicly available. The SKS The popular SKS rifle seems to have avoided the ban list once again but was used as an example of why there is a need for a "comprehensive review of the firearms classification regime" in Canada. Bendayan acknowledged that "we now have one of most complex systems of firearms classification in the world" and that this "creates challenges for lawful gun owners, who deserve certainty". The irony of these statements is unprecedented. RCMP Official D/Commr Bryan Larkin, on behalf of CommrRCMPGRC, stated in response to a question from the media that the gun buyback program for individuals will be rolled out in mid-June in regions under RCMP jurisdiction. Assoc. Min. Bendayan also made sure to "reassure" Canadian hunters in particular that even after all the government's prohibitions (including today's) that there are "still over 19,000 unique makes and models of non-restricted firearms available for hunting and sport shooting". Magazine Restrictions New magazine regulations are also in the works in order to "implement measures necessary to limit high capacity magazines". These new regulations are supposed to be presented in the "coming weeks". The draft regulations tabled in December on the Firearms Reference Table (commonly referred to as the FRT) will be strengthened so that "manufacturers and importers will have to wait for the completion of a technical assessment and obtain a reference number before new firearms can enter the Canadian market". Domestic and Gender-based Violence On the domestic and gender based violence front, the government is moving forward on implementing Bill C-21 regulations. Individuals who are convicted of an offence during which violence was used, threatened or attempted or against their partner or any member of their family will be unable to obtain a firearms licence. Any application for a licence must be refused for these individuals. Firearms licences will also be revoked if authorities have grounds to suspect that any acts of domestic violence or stalking is taking place. Red flag measures will also be used to "temporarily suspend a firearms licence if there are reasonable motives to believe the person should no longer have a licence". City of Winnipeg Bendayan also announced that the City of Winnipeg has just signed a contribution agreement "to participate in the [buyback] program fully". As the press were moderating this announcement, the hand-picked anti-gun lobbyists that the Liberals had trotted out were not given the opportunity to speak, due to how late the press conference started (a very consistent pattern with these announcements). With a new leader being announced Sunday, the Liberals are desperate to complete their attack on legal gun owners. Comment on Youtube: #cdnpoli #guncontrol #canada #firearmrights #TeamCCFR

CCFR/CCDAF

74,618 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

As a firearms educator and a 2A absolutist, I believe the 2nd Amendment is both a human right and a civil right. The 2nd Amendment does not grant permission—it affirms a pre-existing, natural right of all people to keep and bear arms. The U.S. Supreme Court made this clear in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and reaffirmed in McDonald v. Chicago (2010): the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, fundamental to our system of ordered liberty, and incorporated against the states. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the Court further held that the 2nd Amendment protects the right to carry firearms in public for lawful purposes, especially self-defense. But lawful purpose is the key distinction. I teach my students a foundational principle: the mind is the weapon; the gun is the tool. Firearms are carried to defend and protect life, not to impose our will on others—but to ensure that others cannot force their will upon us. We are peaceful, not harmless. We are at a dangerous point in our society where radical leftists are openly taking up arms and encouraging others to do the same, not for self-defense, but to seek out violence against their fellow countrymen. That conduct is not protected by the 2nd Amendment, because the Constitution does not protect violent intent, criminal conspiracy, or political terror. The Supreme Court has been clear across constitutional law that rights do not extend to violent misuse. The 2nd Amendment protects keeping and bearing arms for lawful purposes—it does not protect threats, incitement, or plans to harm others. Just as the First Amendment does not protect true threats or incitement to violence, the Second Amendment does not shield those who seek to abuse it. As a firearms instructor, I am not the government. I am not issuing permits; I am certifying training and competency. Instructors have long-recognized professional discretion and duty of care—especially when credible threats or statements of violent intent are expressed. Is refusing to certify someone who demonstrates dangerous intent gun control, disarmament, and a constitutional violation? Or, is it a private professional judgment, grounded in safety, ethics, and responsibility? When credible threats of violence are made, is alerting law enforcement a betrayal of liberty? The Supreme Court has never held that the 2nd Amendment creates a right to anonymity in violent plotting or shields criminal intent from lawful investigation. So here’s the question I’m wrestling with—and I want your thoughts: As a firearms instructor, should I be able—or obligated—to deny concealed carry certification to individuals who express violent or extremist intent? Should instructors alert law enforcement when credible threats are made? Am I violating my principles by refusing to arm those who seek chaos—or am I upholding the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment? Let me know in the comments.
2:43

As a firearms educator and a 2A absolutist, I believe the 2nd Amendment is both a human right and a civil right. The 2nd Amendment does not grant permission—it affirms a pre-existing, natural right of all people to keep and bear arms. The U.S. Supreme Court made this clear in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and reaffirmed in McDonald v. Chicago (2010): the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, fundamental to our system of ordered liberty, and incorporated against the states. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the Court further held that the 2nd Amendment protects the right to carry firearms in public for lawful purposes, especially self-defense. But lawful purpose is the key distinction. I teach my students a foundational principle: the mind is the weapon; the gun is the tool. Firearms are carried to defend and protect life, not to impose our will on others—but to ensure that others cannot force their will upon us. We are peaceful, not harmless. We are at a dangerous point in our society where radical leftists are openly taking up arms and encouraging others to do the same, not for self-defense, but to seek out violence against their fellow countrymen. That conduct is not protected by the 2nd Amendment, because the Constitution does not protect violent intent, criminal conspiracy, or political terror. The Supreme Court has been clear across constitutional law that rights do not extend to violent misuse. The 2nd Amendment protects keeping and bearing arms for lawful purposes—it does not protect threats, incitement, or plans to harm others. Just as the First Amendment does not protect true threats or incitement to violence, the Second Amendment does not shield those who seek to abuse it. As a firearms instructor, I am not the government. I am not issuing permits; I am certifying training and competency. Instructors have long-recognized professional discretion and duty of care—especially when credible threats or statements of violent intent are expressed. Is refusing to certify someone who demonstrates dangerous intent gun control, disarmament, and a constitutional violation? Or, is it a private professional judgment, grounded in safety, ethics, and responsibility? When credible threats of violence are made, is alerting law enforcement a betrayal of liberty? The Supreme Court has never held that the 2nd Amendment creates a right to anonymity in violent plotting or shields criminal intent from lawful investigation. So here’s the question I’m wrestling with—and I want your thoughts: As a firearms instructor, should I be able—or obligated—to deny concealed carry certification to individuals who express violent or extremist intent? Should instructors alert law enforcement when credible threats are made? Am I violating my principles by refusing to arm those who seek chaos—or am I upholding the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment? Let me know in the comments.

Alicia Garcia

33,744 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

‼️ Montanez Merriweather, a 34 year old is being named as the ringleader of the violent mob attack on white people in downtown Cincinnati. Detectives have even called Merriweather the “CATALYST ” to the viscous attack. He is now facing felonious assault and aggravated riot charges. ‼️ But here is the crazy part. He was already out on bond from a July 10th charge for receiving stolen property, possessing weapons while under disability, improperly handling firearms in a vehicle, and carrying concealed weapons. 😳 But here’s the real shocker: 😳 Merriweather’s has deep history of violent crime going back over 15 years. 📍Back in 2009, he was convicted of aggravated robbery and burglary, kidnapping, with firearms involved, and did seven years plus three more for the gun charges, with parole still hanging over him. 📍Then in 2019, a stolen property charge was DROPPED, no prosecution. 📍Same deal in 2022 with another felonious assault charge IGNORED again. 📍And just a few weeks ago, on July 10, he was hit with charges for receiving stolen property, possessing weapons while under disability, improperly handling firearms in a vehicle, and carrying concealed weapons, yet he posted bond and WALKED FREE. How does someone with this kind of track record keep slipping through the cracks like this⁉️ Should repeat violent offenders like him be denied bail⁉️
0:24

‼️ Montanez Merriweather, a 34 year old is being named as the ringleader of the violent mob attack on white people in downtown Cincinnati. Detectives have even called Merriweather the “CATALYST ” to the viscous attack. He is now facing felonious assault and aggravated riot charges. ‼️ But here is the crazy part. He was already out on bond from a July 10th charge for receiving stolen property, possessing weapons while under disability, improperly handling firearms in a vehicle, and carrying concealed weapons. 😳 But here’s the real shocker: 😳 Merriweather’s has deep history of violent crime going back over 15 years. 📍Back in 2009, he was convicted of aggravated robbery and burglary, kidnapping, with firearms involved, and did seven years plus three more for the gun charges, with parole still hanging over him. 📍Then in 2019, a stolen property charge was DROPPED, no prosecution. 📍Same deal in 2022 with another felonious assault charge IGNORED again. 📍And just a few weeks ago, on July 10, he was hit with charges for receiving stolen property, possessing weapons while under disability, improperly handling firearms in a vehicle, and carrying concealed weapons, yet he posted bond and WALKED FREE. How does someone with this kind of track record keep slipping through the cracks like this⁉️ Should repeat violent offenders like him be denied bail⁉️

Jammles

382,971 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Virginia Rep Tom Garrett LOSES IT on Virginia Democrats for attempting to make almost all gun owners criminals with their new bill “I literally wondered if we were being pranked when I read the words in this bill” “This bill would prevent people in Virginia from carrying on any quote, any public street, highway, alley, etc” He shows that every gun owner in the state goes to fire their guns, taking roads that would now make them criminals “We've literally created a criminal class out of millions, not hyperbolic of Virginians, and defined as an assault weapon, A single shot break action, four 10 shotgun, or a bolt-action rifle with an integral magazine if the barrel's threaded, which enhances lethality. — And while we pardon all kinds of people who are committing crimes and reduce sentences and give judges the discretion to do things like WA off your DUI offense where you might have killed my child, had circumstances gone differently, we're creating criminals on a people who wanna drive to their next door, neighbor's farm and their pickup truck.”
1:42

Virginia Rep Tom Garrett LOSES IT on Virginia Democrats for attempting to make almost all gun owners criminals with their new bill “I literally wondered if we were being pranked when I read the words in this bill” “This bill would prevent people in Virginia from carrying on any quote, any public street, highway, alley, etc” He shows that every gun owner in the state goes to fire their guns, taking roads that would now make them criminals “We've literally created a criminal class out of millions, not hyperbolic of Virginians, and defined as an assault weapon, A single shot break action, four 10 shotgun, or a bolt-action rifle with an integral magazine if the barrel's threaded, which enhances lethality. — And while we pardon all kinds of people who are committing crimes and reduce sentences and give judges the discretion to do things like WA off your DUI offense where you might have killed my child, had circumstances gone differently, we're creating criminals on a people who wanna drive to their next door, neighbor's farm and their pickup truck.”

Wall Street Apes

687,933 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Virginia is banning the sale, purchase, and transfer of AR-15s and other so-called “assault firearms” on July 1st. So what did Virginians do? They bought a record number of them. After Governor Spanberger signed SB 749, Virginia firearm background checks more than doubled compared to the same month last year — and the state ranked second in the entire country for rifle and shotgun-related checks, behind only Texas. The politicians said they were going to get these rifles “off the streets.” Virginians said, “Bet.” That’s the part everybody is laughing about. But the bigger issue is what comes next. Because this ban lets people keep what they already own — for now. And that phrase matters. Sales ban today. Registry tomorrow. Confiscation talk later. That’s how these things move: one “reasonable step” at a time. Virginia tried to ban America’s most popular rifle, prosecutors are already refusing to enforce it, and the people responded the most American way possible — by clearing the shelves before the window closes. Shop the new 2A America hat and I Am The Militia hat: Subscribe, because I’m covering what happens when this ban takes effect July 1st. Shop the “America” hat at:
1:45

Virginia is banning the sale, purchase, and transfer of AR-15s and other so-called “assault firearms” on July 1st. So what did Virginians do? They bought a record number of them. After Governor Spanberger signed SB 749, Virginia firearm background checks more than doubled compared to the same month last year — and the state ranked second in the entire country for rifle and shotgun-related checks, behind only Texas. The politicians said they were going to get these rifles “off the streets.” Virginians said, “Bet.” That’s the part everybody is laughing about. But the bigger issue is what comes next. Because this ban lets people keep what they already own — for now. And that phrase matters. Sales ban today. Registry tomorrow. Confiscation talk later. That’s how these things move: one “reasonable step” at a time. Virginia tried to ban America’s most popular rifle, prosecutors are already refusing to enforce it, and the people responded the most American way possible — by clearing the shelves before the window closes. Shop the new 2A America hat and I Am The Militia hat: Subscribe, because I’m covering what happens when this ban takes effect July 1st. Shop the “America” hat at:

Colion Noir

25,590 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨 Sneaky Move in Committee Today: Democrats Tried to Swap Crime Bill for Gun Ban 🚨 Rob Doar was at the Capitol today with Anna Leamy from the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus. What happened in the Public Safety Committee should have every gun owner paying attention. Rep. Hudson brought a bill to increase penalties for repeat violent offenders using firearms — a real “three strikes” approach focused on criminals. Instead? Democrats attempted a delete-all amendment to wipe out the entire bill and replace it with an assault weapons ban. Not debate it honestly. Not introduce it cleanly. Just hijack a crime bill and swap it out. Thankfully, Chair Rep. Paul Novotny shut that maneuver down today. But here’s the warning ⬇️ The Minnesota House is split 50/50. Committee chairs rotate by day. Today was a Republican chair. Next Tuesday? It’s the Democrats’ turn under Rep. Kelly Moller. Based on today’s attempted sneak attack, expect: ❌ Assault Weapons Ban ❌ Magazine Capacity Limits ❌ Ban on 3D-printed firearms ❌ Criminalizing gun code ❌ Mandatory storage mandates They tested the waters today. Next week, they may bring the full package. 🎥 Watch Rob Doar break it down — with Anna on the ground working the Capitol for you. 📅 Get your Tuesday schedule ready. We’ll confirm details — but be prepared to show up. Stay alert. They’re not hiding their playbook anymore. ⚡ TAKE ACTION: 📝 SIGN A PETITION: ✊ JOIN THE FIGHT: 🛡️ BECOME A 2A DEFENDER: 💥 DONATE: #mnleg #mn2a #2A
2:36

🚨 Sneaky Move in Committee Today: Democrats Tried to Swap Crime Bill for Gun Ban 🚨 Rob Doar was at the Capitol today with Anna Leamy from the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus. What happened in the Public Safety Committee should have every gun owner paying attention. Rep. Hudson brought a bill to increase penalties for repeat violent offenders using firearms — a real “three strikes” approach focused on criminals. Instead? Democrats attempted a delete-all amendment to wipe out the entire bill and replace it with an assault weapons ban. Not debate it honestly. Not introduce it cleanly. Just hijack a crime bill and swap it out. Thankfully, Chair Rep. Paul Novotny shut that maneuver down today. But here’s the warning ⬇️ The Minnesota House is split 50/50. Committee chairs rotate by day. Today was a Republican chair. Next Tuesday? It’s the Democrats’ turn under Rep. Kelly Moller. Based on today’s attempted sneak attack, expect: ❌ Assault Weapons Ban ❌ Magazine Capacity Limits ❌ Ban on 3D-printed firearms ❌ Criminalizing gun code ❌ Mandatory storage mandates They tested the waters today. Next week, they may bring the full package. 🎥 Watch Rob Doar break it down — with Anna on the ground working the Capitol for you. 📅 Get your Tuesday schedule ready. We’ll confirm details — but be prepared to show up. Stay alert. They’re not hiding their playbook anymore. ⚡ TAKE ACTION: 📝 SIGN A PETITION: ✊ JOIN THE FIGHT: 🛡️ BECOME A 2A DEFENDER: 💥 DONATE: #mnleg #mn2a #2A

MN Gun Owners Caucus

20,571 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

🚨BREAKING: In Everett, MA, an ICE agent appears to drop their firearm, while multiple agents are on top of a man…then another agent falsely claims the man was grabbing the gun. In the video, as the gun falls to the ground, and is tossed away from the pile of agents, another agent can be heard yelling, “He grabbed your gun. He grabbed your gun.” Except… the video appears to show the exact opposite. The firearm wasn’t in the man’s hands. It had already been thrown away from the struggle. This is exactly why poorly trained agents are so dangerous. The second someone yells, “He’s got the gun,” every officer on the scene has to make a split-second decision, based on that information. If that information is wrong, you’ve just created a situation where someone could be shot because another agent panicked, or falsely identified what happened. We’ve seen this before with Alex Pretti. Federal agents carrying firearms should be trained well enough not to lose control of their weapon… and certainly not to falsely claim the person they’re arresting has it. We’ve now seen multiple videos of agents dropping magazines, firearms, and handling their weapons in ways that raise serious safety concerns. Every time DHS puts poorly trained agents on the street, with the unlimited power to detain people and carry loaded firearms, they are putting the public, bystanders, and even their own agents at risk. And until there is real accountability for reckless conduct, and inadequate training, these dangerous incidents will keep happening. The public shouldn’t have to wonder whether the biggest threat during an arrest is the person being detained… or the agent carrying the gun.
2:39

🚨BREAKING: In Everett, MA, an ICE agent appears to drop their firearm, while multiple agents are on top of a man…then another agent falsely claims the man was grabbing the gun. In the video, as the gun falls to the ground, and is tossed away from the pile of agents, another agent can be heard yelling, “He grabbed your gun. He grabbed your gun.” Except… the video appears to show the exact opposite. The firearm wasn’t in the man’s hands. It had already been thrown away from the struggle. This is exactly why poorly trained agents are so dangerous. The second someone yells, “He’s got the gun,” every officer on the scene has to make a split-second decision, based on that information. If that information is wrong, you’ve just created a situation where someone could be shot because another agent panicked, or falsely identified what happened. We’ve seen this before with Alex Pretti. Federal agents carrying firearms should be trained well enough not to lose control of their weapon… and certainly not to falsely claim the person they’re arresting has it. We’ve now seen multiple videos of agents dropping magazines, firearms, and handling their weapons in ways that raise serious safety concerns. Every time DHS puts poorly trained agents on the street, with the unlimited power to detain people and carry loaded firearms, they are putting the public, bystanders, and even their own agents at risk. And until there is real accountability for reckless conduct, and inadequate training, these dangerous incidents will keep happening. The public shouldn’t have to wonder whether the biggest threat during an arrest is the person being detained… or the agent carrying the gun.

Jesus Freakin Congress

100,927 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Many people around the world are being told that Trump is the racist and Biden is the good guy. Unknown to them, it was Biden who pushed some of the most racist pieces of legislation in the United States that sent thousands of black and brown people to prison for drug use or possession. Still, when his own son Hunter Biden became an addict, he defended him and even praised him. It’s often called the law of karma. It’s like when the most anti-gay parent ends up having only gay children, or the most anti-immigrant person has to deal with the fact that their only daughter has fallen in love with an undocumented immigrant and is ready to leave the country to be with them in Guatemala or Sudan. One of the legislations that Biden pushed fervently was in 1986, when crack cocaine was more prevalent in black communities, while powder cocaine was more common among White users. As white and black people were using hard drugs, Biden and his colleagues decided in their wisdom to craft a bill that punished black and brown people a hundred times more severely. It was known as the 100:1 disparity and was widely criticized for being racially discriminatory and contributing to systemic racial inequities in the criminal justice system. The 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine refers to a provision in the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which mandated significantly harsher penalties for offenses involving crack cocaine compared to those involving powder cocaine. Specifically, the law required the same mandatory minimum prison sentence for possession of 5 grams of crack cocaine as it did for 500 grams of powder cocaine—a 100:1 ratio. More than two decades later, in 2010, the Fair Sentencing Act reduced the disparity from 100:1 to 18:1, raising the amount of crack cocaine needed to trigger the mandatory minimum sentence to 28 grams. As you can see, even the reduced ratio still perpetuated unjust sentencing disparities. In case you missed what I just said, here is a summary. 1. Mandatory Minimum Sentences: Crack Cocaine (used mainly by black people): Possession of 5 grams triggered a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years in federal prison. Powder Cocaine (used mainly by white people): Possession of 500 grams triggered the same 5-year mandatory minimum sentence. 2. Impact on Sentencing: The disparity above led to much longer prison sentences for individuals convicted of offenses involving crack cocaine compared to those involving powder cocaine, despite the substances being pharmacologically similar. 3. Racial Disparities: Crack cocaine was more commonly used in urban, predominantly black communities, while powder cocaine was more prevalent among white and more affluent users. This resulted in disproportionately high incarceration rates for black individuals relative to white individuals for similar drug offenses. Below is a recap of some of the most racist bills that Biden fervently pushed, including the 1994 Crime Bill that sent thousands of black and brown people to prison and ruined their lives forever for drug possession. 1. 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act: This act increased federal penalties for many crimes, established new mandatory minimum sentences, and introduced new measures for asset forfeiture. Critics argue that these policies disproportionately impacted black and brown communities. 2. 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act: This legislation introduced mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses, including a controversial 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine, as explained above. 3. 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (Crime Bill): The bill included provisions for “three strikes” mandatory life sentences, allocated funds for new prisons, and expanded the death penalty. It also included funding for community policing and the Violence Against Women Act. Critics argue that the bill contributed to mass incarceration, which disproportionately affected Black and Brown communities. 4. 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (Welfare Reform): This act aimed to reduce welfare dependency through work requirements and time limits on benefits. Critics contend that it disproportionately affected low-income families, many of whom were black and brown, by reducing their access to social safety nets.
1:22

Many people around the world are being told that Trump is the racist and Biden is the good guy. Unknown to them, it was Biden who pushed some of the most racist pieces of legislation in the United States that sent thousands of black and brown people to prison for drug use or possession. Still, when his own son Hunter Biden became an addict, he defended him and even praised him. It’s often called the law of karma. It’s like when the most anti-gay parent ends up having only gay children, or the most anti-immigrant person has to deal with the fact that their only daughter has fallen in love with an undocumented immigrant and is ready to leave the country to be with them in Guatemala or Sudan. One of the legislations that Biden pushed fervently was in 1986, when crack cocaine was more prevalent in black communities, while powder cocaine was more common among White users. As white and black people were using hard drugs, Biden and his colleagues decided in their wisdom to craft a bill that punished black and brown people a hundred times more severely. It was known as the 100:1 disparity and was widely criticized for being racially discriminatory and contributing to systemic racial inequities in the criminal justice system. The 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine refers to a provision in the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which mandated significantly harsher penalties for offenses involving crack cocaine compared to those involving powder cocaine. Specifically, the law required the same mandatory minimum prison sentence for possession of 5 grams of crack cocaine as it did for 500 grams of powder cocaine—a 100:1 ratio. More than two decades later, in 2010, the Fair Sentencing Act reduced the disparity from 100:1 to 18:1, raising the amount of crack cocaine needed to trigger the mandatory minimum sentence to 28 grams. As you can see, even the reduced ratio still perpetuated unjust sentencing disparities. In case you missed what I just said, here is a summary. 1. Mandatory Minimum Sentences: Crack Cocaine (used mainly by black people): Possession of 5 grams triggered a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years in federal prison. Powder Cocaine (used mainly by white people): Possession of 500 grams triggered the same 5-year mandatory minimum sentence. 2. Impact on Sentencing: The disparity above led to much longer prison sentences for individuals convicted of offenses involving crack cocaine compared to those involving powder cocaine, despite the substances being pharmacologically similar. 3. Racial Disparities: Crack cocaine was more commonly used in urban, predominantly black communities, while powder cocaine was more prevalent among white and more affluent users. This resulted in disproportionately high incarceration rates for black individuals relative to white individuals for similar drug offenses. Below is a recap of some of the most racist bills that Biden fervently pushed, including the 1994 Crime Bill that sent thousands of black and brown people to prison and ruined their lives forever for drug possession. 1. 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act: This act increased federal penalties for many crimes, established new mandatory minimum sentences, and introduced new measures for asset forfeiture. Critics argue that these policies disproportionately impacted black and brown communities. 2. 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act: This legislation introduced mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses, including a controversial 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine, as explained above. 3. 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (Crime Bill): The bill included provisions for “three strikes” mandatory life sentences, allocated funds for new prisons, and expanded the death penalty. It also included funding for community policing and the Violence Against Women Act. Critics argue that the bill contributed to mass incarceration, which disproportionately affected Black and Brown communities. 4. 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (Welfare Reform): This act aimed to reduce welfare dependency through work requirements and time limits on benefits. Critics contend that it disproportionately affected low-income families, many of whom were black and brown, by reducing their access to social safety nets.

Simon Ateba

445,856 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🚨 BREAKING: PM Mark Carney is heading to Tumbler Ridge TODAY for a “vigil” after that horrific mass shooting that left NINE innocent people dead—including kids at school! 😡 But let’s call it what it is: PURE GASLIGHTING! He’s showing up for photo ops while violent crime in Canada has SPIKED—Statistics Canada reports the Violent Crime Severity Index hit 99.87 last year, up from 87.99 just five years ago! And 62% of Canadians feel crime is WORSE in their communities, according to Angus Reid polls. If you’re a politician voting AGAINST tougher safety bills like the Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act (C-12) that cracks down on transnational crime and fentanyl trafficking , or ignoring calls for real gun control after tragedies like this, YOU DON’T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT CANADIANS’ LIVES! 😤 How many more shootings before you wake up? Look at almost daily in Ontario ILLEGAL firearms being used, but that’s ignored to go after LEGAL owners 🤬🤦🏻‍♂️ Retweet if you’re FED UP! #Cdnpoli #TumblerRidgeShooting #MakeCanadaSafe #CarneyGaslighting #StopTheViolence 🇨🇦
1:48

🚨 BREAKING: PM Mark Carney is heading to Tumbler Ridge TODAY for a “vigil” after that horrific mass shooting that left NINE innocent people dead—including kids at school! 😡 But let’s call it what it is: PURE GASLIGHTING! He’s showing up for photo ops while violent crime in Canada has SPIKED—Statistics Canada reports the Violent Crime Severity Index hit 99.87 last year, up from 87.99 just five years ago! And 62% of Canadians feel crime is WORSE in their communities, according to Angus Reid polls. If you’re a politician voting AGAINST tougher safety bills like the Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act (C-12) that cracks down on transnational crime and fentanyl trafficking , or ignoring calls for real gun control after tragedies like this, YOU DON’T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT CANADIANS’ LIVES! 😤 How many more shootings before you wake up? Look at almost daily in Ontario ILLEGAL firearms being used, but that’s ignored to go after LEGAL owners 🤬🤦🏻‍♂️ Retweet if you’re FED UP! #Cdnpoli #TumblerRidgeShooting #MakeCanadaSafe #CarneyGaslighting #StopTheViolence 🇨🇦

JayGen 𝕏 er🇨🇦

33,101 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

The Firearms Control Amendment Bill cannot be steamrolled through Parliament. In the Portfolio Committee on Police, I raised a serious concern with the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service. On slide 9 of their presentation, the Secretariat referred to the review of the Firearms Control Amendment Bill and used the words “to ensure enactment.” That wording matters. It suggests that the outcome has already been decided: push the Bill through, and treat Parliament and public participation as process boxes to tick afterwards. I asked the Secretariat directly whether they intend to advance the Bill in its current form, or whether they are prepared to substantially reconsider it based on actual evidence and stakeholder input. Because right now, the approach does not line up with the serious concerns raised by stakeholders, the slow Nedlac process, and the failures we already see in the current firearm control system. My question was simple: Why is the Department prioritising further legislative restriction before demonstrating measurable improvements in: -the Central Firearms Registry; -SAPS’s own firearm losses; -illegal firearm recovery; -firearm tracing; -ballistic capacity; and -actual enforcement against criminal possession of firearms? I also made it clear: the Portfolio Committee on Police is not a rubber stamp. The Secretariat then made an important concession. They accepted that the word “enactment” may need to be revised. More importantly, they confirmed that they have commissioned research into whether the current firearm legislation is actually being fully implemented, and what the failures in implementation are. The most important line from the response was this: “We can’t rush to the amendment of legislation if, for instance, it’s the failures of the implementation of the current legislation.” That is exactly the point. Marco van Niekerk captured this well in his article. The concern is that government appears to be moving towards new restrictions before properly diagnosing the real problem. He also points out that the failures are not theoretical: CFR dysfunction, state firearm losses, weak tracing capability, and limited enforcement against criminal possession of illegal firearms are all part of the problem. (Here is Marco’s article on The Common Sense: And to add insult to injury, this past week the SANDF confirmed that military weapons were stolen from Tek Base in Lyttelton. Reports state that three R4 assault rifles and a grenade launcher were stolen after a break-in was discovered on 27 April. Access was suspected to have been gained by cutting a hole in the perimeter fence, and a burglar door was forced open. That raises obvious questions. Where were the controls? Was there functioning CCTV? Were there alarm systems? Were there access logs? Were there armed patrols? Were inventories being audited? How can military-grade weapons be stolen from a base while government wants to tell law-abiding citizens that the problem is that they are not regulated enough? This is the contradiction. The State loses firearms. The State fails to secure military weapons. The State struggles with tracing and ballistics. The CFR remains dysfunctional. Criminals continue to possess illegal firearms. But the policy answer is apparently more restriction on lawful firearm owners. That is not good enough. South Africa does not need symbolic legislation. We need enforcement. We need working systems. We need accountability. We need functioning ballistics. We need a competent CFR. We need state-owned firearms secured. We need illegal firearms recovered. We need criminals prosecuted. Any revised Firearms Control Amendment Bill must be evidence-based, transparent and properly consulted on. No steamrolling. No predetermined enactment. No rubber-stamping. Fix the State’s failures first.
4:42

The Firearms Control Amendment Bill cannot be steamrolled through Parliament. In the Portfolio Committee on Police, I raised a serious concern with the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service. On slide 9 of their presentation, the Secretariat referred to the review of the Firearms Control Amendment Bill and used the words “to ensure enactment.” That wording matters. It suggests that the outcome has already been decided: push the Bill through, and treat Parliament and public participation as process boxes to tick afterwards. I asked the Secretariat directly whether they intend to advance the Bill in its current form, or whether they are prepared to substantially reconsider it based on actual evidence and stakeholder input. Because right now, the approach does not line up with the serious concerns raised by stakeholders, the slow Nedlac process, and the failures we already see in the current firearm control system. My question was simple: Why is the Department prioritising further legislative restriction before demonstrating measurable improvements in: -the Central Firearms Registry; -SAPS’s own firearm losses; -illegal firearm recovery; -firearm tracing; -ballistic capacity; and -actual enforcement against criminal possession of firearms? I also made it clear: the Portfolio Committee on Police is not a rubber stamp. The Secretariat then made an important concession. They accepted that the word “enactment” may need to be revised. More importantly, they confirmed that they have commissioned research into whether the current firearm legislation is actually being fully implemented, and what the failures in implementation are. The most important line from the response was this: “We can’t rush to the amendment of legislation if, for instance, it’s the failures of the implementation of the current legislation.” That is exactly the point. Marco van Niekerk captured this well in his article. The concern is that government appears to be moving towards new restrictions before properly diagnosing the real problem. He also points out that the failures are not theoretical: CFR dysfunction, state firearm losses, weak tracing capability, and limited enforcement against criminal possession of illegal firearms are all part of the problem. (Here is Marco’s article on The Common Sense: And to add insult to injury, this past week the SANDF confirmed that military weapons were stolen from Tek Base in Lyttelton. Reports state that three R4 assault rifles and a grenade launcher were stolen after a break-in was discovered on 27 April. Access was suspected to have been gained by cutting a hole in the perimeter fence, and a burglar door was forced open. That raises obvious questions. Where were the controls? Was there functioning CCTV? Were there alarm systems? Were there access logs? Were there armed patrols? Were inventories being audited? How can military-grade weapons be stolen from a base while government wants to tell law-abiding citizens that the problem is that they are not regulated enough? This is the contradiction. The State loses firearms. The State fails to secure military weapons. The State struggles with tracing and ballistics. The CFR remains dysfunctional. Criminals continue to possess illegal firearms. But the policy answer is apparently more restriction on lawful firearm owners. That is not good enough. South Africa does not need symbolic legislation. We need enforcement. We need working systems. We need accountability. We need functioning ballistics. We need a competent CFR. We need state-owned firearms secured. We need illegal firearms recovered. We need criminals prosecuted. Any revised Firearms Control Amendment Bill must be evidence-based, transparent and properly consulted on. No steamrolling. No predetermined enactment. No rubber-stamping. Fix the State’s failures first.

Ian Cameron

15,352 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Virginia Rep Tom Garrett BLASTS Virginia Democrats for trying to effectively make almost all gun owners criminals thanks to their new bill: “I literally wondered if we were being pranked when I read the words in this bill.” “This bill would prevent people in Virginia from carrying on any quote, any public street, highway, alley, etc.” “We've literally created a criminal class out of millions, not hyperbolic of Virginians, and defined as an assault weapon, A single shot break action, four 10 shotgun, or a bolt-action rifle with an integral magazine if the barrel's threaded, which enhances lethality. And while we pardon all kinds of people who are committing crimes and reduce sentences and give judges the discretion to do things like WA off your DUI offense where you might have killed my child, had circumstances gone differently, we're creating criminals on a people who wanna drive to their next door, neighbor's farm and their pickup truck.” REPOST this EVERYWHERE! #thinblueline #lawenforcement
1:42

Virginia Rep Tom Garrett BLASTS Virginia Democrats for trying to effectively make almost all gun owners criminals thanks to their new bill: “I literally wondered if we were being pranked when I read the words in this bill.” “This bill would prevent people in Virginia from carrying on any quote, any public street, highway, alley, etc.” “We've literally created a criminal class out of millions, not hyperbolic of Virginians, and defined as an assault weapon, A single shot break action, four 10 shotgun, or a bolt-action rifle with an integral magazine if the barrel's threaded, which enhances lethality. And while we pardon all kinds of people who are committing crimes and reduce sentences and give judges the discretion to do things like WA off your DUI offense where you might have killed my child, had circumstances gone differently, we're creating criminals on a people who wanna drive to their next door, neighbor's farm and their pickup truck.” REPOST this EVERYWHERE! #thinblueline #lawenforcement

Blue Lives Matter

13,880 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

🎬: Colorado is trying to punish gun owners for the acts of criminals by trying to pass a gun bill that will force gun owners to pay taxes for the acts of criminals. They are essentially financially punishing Americans for exercising a constitutional right. The Bill is HB 24-1349 and what it does is creates an 11% excise tax on the sale of all firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition in the state. Firearms and ammunition are already subject to an 11% federal excise tax through the Pittman-Robertson Act, along with various other state and local taxes and fees. There's also a second bill Colorodo is trying to pass which is HB 24-1348 which mandates that firearms stored in unattended vehicles must be kept in a locked hard-sided container that is kept out of view or within the locked trunk of the vehicle. I get that the idea behind this bill is to make it harder to have people's guns stolen, but you don't have to mandate the action. Most people throw them into glove boxes or center consoles. Which I get isn't the most secure, but having it in a hard-sided container that can simply be picked up and taken isn't any more secure either, which is why I sell my Colion Noir Edition Lifepod portable gun cases that come with a 19-inch steel security cable that gives you the ability to secure your Lifepod Gun safe to your car preventing most snatch and grab attempts. This keeps your gun more secure than simply throwing your gun in your glove box, center console, or hard-sided case that isn't secured to your car. Also, The Colion Noir edition Lifepod is TSA-approved and makes flying with a gun a breeze. So, if you want to learn more about the Colion Noir edition Lifepod click here: ➡️ Comment your thoughts below on these bills, BUT before you do that, I want to let you know that my favorite in-ear Wireless Bluetooth hearing protection, the Blackouts, is available again ➡️ These incredible things allow you to listen to music, take phone calls, have active noise cancelation, and hear through technology that allows you to still hear the world around you all while still protecting your hearing with a certified NRR rating of 25, Get them here before they're sold out again. ➡️ New 40oz 2A Tumblers, 2A Designs, Vacuum Insulated, With Handle & Straw ➡️
4:19

🎬: Colorado is trying to punish gun owners for the acts of criminals by trying to pass a gun bill that will force gun owners to pay taxes for the acts of criminals. They are essentially financially punishing Americans for exercising a constitutional right. The Bill is HB 24-1349 and what it does is creates an 11% excise tax on the sale of all firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition in the state. Firearms and ammunition are already subject to an 11% federal excise tax through the Pittman-Robertson Act, along with various other state and local taxes and fees. There's also a second bill Colorodo is trying to pass which is HB 24-1348 which mandates that firearms stored in unattended vehicles must be kept in a locked hard-sided container that is kept out of view or within the locked trunk of the vehicle. I get that the idea behind this bill is to make it harder to have people's guns stolen, but you don't have to mandate the action. Most people throw them into glove boxes or center consoles. Which I get isn't the most secure, but having it in a hard-sided container that can simply be picked up and taken isn't any more secure either, which is why I sell my Colion Noir Edition Lifepod portable gun cases that come with a 19-inch steel security cable that gives you the ability to secure your Lifepod Gun safe to your car preventing most snatch and grab attempts. This keeps your gun more secure than simply throwing your gun in your glove box, center console, or hard-sided case that isn't secured to your car. Also, The Colion Noir edition Lifepod is TSA-approved and makes flying with a gun a breeze. So, if you want to learn more about the Colion Noir edition Lifepod click here: ➡️ Comment your thoughts below on these bills, BUT before you do that, I want to let you know that my favorite in-ear Wireless Bluetooth hearing protection, the Blackouts, is available again ➡️ These incredible things allow you to listen to music, take phone calls, have active noise cancelation, and hear through technology that allows you to still hear the world around you all while still protecting your hearing with a certified NRR rating of 25, Get them here before they're sold out again. ➡️ New 40oz 2A Tumblers, 2A Designs, Vacuum Insulated, With Handle & Straw ➡️

Colion Noir

33,949 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Today, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham issued an emergency order temporarily suspending open and concealed carry laws in Albuquerque and throughout Bernalillo County for the next 30 days. This move has been positioned as a response to the alarming and tragic rise in gun violence, particularly the heart-wrenching death of an 11-year-old boy this past week. First and foremost, every lost life is a tragedy, and the well-being of our community is of paramount concern to the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office. We share in the collective grief and urgency to address this issue. However, as the elected Sheriff, I have reservations regarding this order. While I understand and appreciate the urgency, the temporary ban challenges the foundation of our Constitution, which I swore an oath to uphold. I am wary of placing my deputies in positions that could lead to civil liability conflicts, as well as the potential risks posed by prohibiting law-abiding citizens from their constitutional right to self-defense. I was elected to represent and safeguard all constituents and to ensure the balance between our rights and public safety is maintained. That means we must critically evaluate any proposed solution to the deeply rooted issue of gun violence, ensuring we both protect our community and uphold the values that define us as a nation. To proactively address gun violence, the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office has implemented and is currently executing several initiatives: 1. ERPO (Extreme Risk Protection Orders) - Identifying and addressing threats before they escalate. 2. Behavioral Health Unit - Addressing underlying mental health issues that often intersect with violent incidents. 3. Youth and Gun Violence Initiative - Focused programs to curb youth involvement in gun-related crimes. 4. Felon Firearm Possession Intervention - Targeting felons illegally in possession of firearms. 5. Crime Commission Initiative - Zeroing in on cases where firearms are used in the commission of crimes. 6. Interagency Collaboration - Partnering with State, Local, and Federal entities to create a unified front against gun violence. 7. Creation of a Violence Intervention Program - Intervening in gun violence before crimes happen through intel and inter-agency collaboration. In conclusion, while we might not be in complete alignment with the Governor's recent order, we remain steadfast in our commitment to work collaboratively, both with her office and with the community, to find sustainable solutions to the gun violence epidemic plaguing our county. It is through robust dialogues, open-mindedness, and the shared goal of a safer Bernalillo County that we will find our way forward. Thank you for your understanding and continued support. Sheriff John Allen Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office
0:27

Today, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham issued an emergency order temporarily suspending open and concealed carry laws in Albuquerque and throughout Bernalillo County for the next 30 days. This move has been positioned as a response to the alarming and tragic rise in gun violence, particularly the heart-wrenching death of an 11-year-old boy this past week. First and foremost, every lost life is a tragedy, and the well-being of our community is of paramount concern to the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office. We share in the collective grief and urgency to address this issue. However, as the elected Sheriff, I have reservations regarding this order. While I understand and appreciate the urgency, the temporary ban challenges the foundation of our Constitution, which I swore an oath to uphold. I am wary of placing my deputies in positions that could lead to civil liability conflicts, as well as the potential risks posed by prohibiting law-abiding citizens from their constitutional right to self-defense. I was elected to represent and safeguard all constituents and to ensure the balance between our rights and public safety is maintained. That means we must critically evaluate any proposed solution to the deeply rooted issue of gun violence, ensuring we both protect our community and uphold the values that define us as a nation. To proactively address gun violence, the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office has implemented and is currently executing several initiatives: 1. ERPO (Extreme Risk Protection Orders) - Identifying and addressing threats before they escalate. 2. Behavioral Health Unit - Addressing underlying mental health issues that often intersect with violent incidents. 3. Youth and Gun Violence Initiative - Focused programs to curb youth involvement in gun-related crimes. 4. Felon Firearm Possession Intervention - Targeting felons illegally in possession of firearms. 5. Crime Commission Initiative - Zeroing in on cases where firearms are used in the commission of crimes. 6. Interagency Collaboration - Partnering with State, Local, and Federal entities to create a unified front against gun violence. 7. Creation of a Violence Intervention Program - Intervening in gun violence before crimes happen through intel and inter-agency collaboration. In conclusion, while we might not be in complete alignment with the Governor's recent order, we remain steadfast in our commitment to work collaboratively, both with her office and with the community, to find sustainable solutions to the gun violence epidemic plaguing our county. It is through robust dialogues, open-mindedness, and the shared goal of a safer Bernalillo County that we will find our way forward. Thank you for your understanding and continued support. Sheriff John Allen Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office

BCSO (Sheriff) NM

1,419,852 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

🇿🇦 A High Court judgment delivered on 2 February 2026 has now confirmed, in black and white, that the Central Firearms Registry has been acting unlawfully‼️‼️ This is no longer a complaint from gun owners or dealers. It is a court finding. The Marksman Arms judgment is critical because it exposes systemic abuse of power inside the CFR, not minor administrative error. The court found that firearm and dealer licence applications were unlawfully delayed, obstructed and effectively refused without any authority in the Firearms Control Act. At the centre of this failure sits Brigadier Sikhakhane, the head of the Central Firearms Registry. The judgment makes it clear that the unlawful conduct complained of occurred under her leadership and authority. This includes shifting requirements, invented criteria, endless delays and decisions taken without procedural fairness. That is not lawful administration. It is institutional incompetence. The court explicitly rejected CFR’s standard defence of “capacity constraints” and backlogs. The law does not bend because CFR cannot manage itself. Administrative incapacity is not a lawful excuse for violating citizens’ rights. If the CFR is dysfunctional, that failure rests squarely with its leadership. When a High Court has to remind the head of a national registry that public officials may only exercise powers granted by Parliament, it is an indictment of both competence and attitude. This is not caution or public safety. It is useless governance. The real-world consequence is dangerous. Law-abiding South Africans who comply with training, background checks, renewals and safe storage are systematically disadvantaged. Criminals, meanwhile, face no CFR forms, no refusals and no delays. They continue to acquire and use illicit firearms freely, through gangs, corruption and organised crime networks that CFR has shown no ability to disrupt. The result is a system that punishes compliance while criminals do as they please. This judgment draws a clear line. Under Brigadier Sikhakhane’s leadership, the CFR has drifted into policy-making by obstruction, something it has no constitutional mandate to do. Public safety cannot be achieved by quietly sabotaging legislation through unlawful administration. We will soon officially have to zoom in on the Central Firearms Registry, its leadership, its decision-making processes and its compliance with the Firearms Control Act and PAJA. Court findings of this seriousness demand oversight, consequences and reform. You do not build safety by disarming the compliant while criminals remain armed. That is not gun control. That is governance failure. Ian Cameron Crime Activist// Chairperson: Portfolio Committee on Police// Member of Parliament of the Republic of South Africa 🇿🇦
0:22

🇿🇦 A High Court judgment delivered on 2 February 2026 has now confirmed, in black and white, that the Central Firearms Registry has been acting unlawfully‼️‼️ This is no longer a complaint from gun owners or dealers. It is a court finding. The Marksman Arms judgment is critical because it exposes systemic abuse of power inside the CFR, not minor administrative error. The court found that firearm and dealer licence applications were unlawfully delayed, obstructed and effectively refused without any authority in the Firearms Control Act. At the centre of this failure sits Brigadier Sikhakhane, the head of the Central Firearms Registry. The judgment makes it clear that the unlawful conduct complained of occurred under her leadership and authority. This includes shifting requirements, invented criteria, endless delays and decisions taken without procedural fairness. That is not lawful administration. It is institutional incompetence. The court explicitly rejected CFR’s standard defence of “capacity constraints” and backlogs. The law does not bend because CFR cannot manage itself. Administrative incapacity is not a lawful excuse for violating citizens’ rights. If the CFR is dysfunctional, that failure rests squarely with its leadership. When a High Court has to remind the head of a national registry that public officials may only exercise powers granted by Parliament, it is an indictment of both competence and attitude. This is not caution or public safety. It is useless governance. The real-world consequence is dangerous. Law-abiding South Africans who comply with training, background checks, renewals and safe storage are systematically disadvantaged. Criminals, meanwhile, face no CFR forms, no refusals and no delays. They continue to acquire and use illicit firearms freely, through gangs, corruption and organised crime networks that CFR has shown no ability to disrupt. The result is a system that punishes compliance while criminals do as they please. This judgment draws a clear line. Under Brigadier Sikhakhane’s leadership, the CFR has drifted into policy-making by obstruction, something it has no constitutional mandate to do. Public safety cannot be achieved by quietly sabotaging legislation through unlawful administration. We will soon officially have to zoom in on the Central Firearms Registry, its leadership, its decision-making processes and its compliance with the Firearms Control Act and PAJA. Court findings of this seriousness demand oversight, consequences and reform. You do not build safety by disarming the compliant while criminals remain armed. That is not gun control. That is governance failure. Ian Cameron Crime Activist// Chairperson: Portfolio Committee on Police// Member of Parliament of the Republic of South Africa 🇿🇦

I ❤️ Cape Town ~ I Stand with Russia🇷🇺 MAGA

88,304 Aufrufe • vor 28 Tagen

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents were caught, on video, recklessly pointing their GUNS at a CHILD, and multiple other unarmed U.S. citizens… who were nowhere near them… while demanding a legal resident prove his immigration status, in Immokalee, Florida. And this all happened in a busy gas station parking lot… In the video, a person is recording while walking toward the sidewalk… When suddenly, an ICE agent draws his firearm, turns around, and points his gun directly at the unarmed U.S. citizen. And just to be clear… No one was attacking him, rushing toward him, or even armed with any sort of weapon. In fact, no one was even close enough to pose an immediate physical threat. Then, the agent, with his gun still drawn, orders a car to move. As it backs up, he recklessly sweeps his loaded firearm across multiple unarmed people… including a MINOR… who are standing on a public sidewalk, legally record from a distance. The person filming keeps asking… “What’s the threat?” Because the video clearly doesn’t show one. Moments later, the same agent points his gun at the person filming, AGAIN. Then, a shirtless man walks around the vehicle to see what’s happening, and the agent immediately points the gun at him, too. At this point, a second ICE agent is seen, standing on the side of the car, with HIS gun drawn, too. And after all of that… The man, they were demanding papers from, walks away because he wasn’t undocumented. And the ICE agents get into their car and leave. Federal officers are trained to draw their firearms only when they reasonably believe there is an imminent threat of death, or serious bodily harm. Every time a loaded firearm is pointed at someone, there is a risk of a tragic mistake… especially in a public place where innocent bystanders could be caught in the middle. And once again… recording federal agents, from a public place, is protected by the First Amendment, so long as you are not interfering with their duties. And no one was interfering… or even near them. So, what exactly justified having multiple firearms drawn, and pointed at unarmed people, in a crowded gas station parking lot? This wasn’t just dangerous for the people filming… It was dangerous for everyone in that parking lot. And this video is just another example of what happens when poorly trained ICE agents aren’t held accountable.
2:42

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents were caught, on video, recklessly pointing their GUNS at a CHILD, and multiple other unarmed U.S. citizens… who were nowhere near them… while demanding a legal resident prove his immigration status, in Immokalee, Florida. And this all happened in a busy gas station parking lot… In the video, a person is recording while walking toward the sidewalk… When suddenly, an ICE agent draws his firearm, turns around, and points his gun directly at the unarmed U.S. citizen. And just to be clear… No one was attacking him, rushing toward him, or even armed with any sort of weapon. In fact, no one was even close enough to pose an immediate physical threat. Then, the agent, with his gun still drawn, orders a car to move. As it backs up, he recklessly sweeps his loaded firearm across multiple unarmed people… including a MINOR… who are standing on a public sidewalk, legally record from a distance. The person filming keeps asking… “What’s the threat?” Because the video clearly doesn’t show one. Moments later, the same agent points his gun at the person filming, AGAIN. Then, a shirtless man walks around the vehicle to see what’s happening, and the agent immediately points the gun at him, too. At this point, a second ICE agent is seen, standing on the side of the car, with HIS gun drawn, too. And after all of that… The man, they were demanding papers from, walks away because he wasn’t undocumented. And the ICE agents get into their car and leave. Federal officers are trained to draw their firearms only when they reasonably believe there is an imminent threat of death, or serious bodily harm. Every time a loaded firearm is pointed at someone, there is a risk of a tragic mistake… especially in a public place where innocent bystanders could be caught in the middle. And once again… recording federal agents, from a public place, is protected by the First Amendment, so long as you are not interfering with their duties. And no one was interfering… or even near them. So, what exactly justified having multiple firearms drawn, and pointed at unarmed people, in a crowded gas station parking lot? This wasn’t just dangerous for the people filming… It was dangerous for everyone in that parking lot. And this video is just another example of what happens when poorly trained ICE agents aren’t held accountable.

Jesus Freakin Congress

244,335 Aufrufe • vor 17 Tagen