Tag Archives: Gun Control

What is Propaganda? This is Propaganda

by Jason Van Tatenhove , August 9, 2016

Propaganda

Jason Van Tatenhove

“Propaganda” is information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. Propaganda is often associated with the psychological mechanisms of influencing and altering the attitude of a population toward a specific cause, position or political agenda in an effort to form a consensus to a standard set of belief patterns.

Propaganda is information that is not impartial and is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, often by presenting facts selectively (perhaps lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or using loadedmessages to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information presented.” (according to Wikipedia)

This video is a perfect example of propaganda being put out by the SPLC.

We find ourselves surrounded and inundated by such propaganda everyday. Over the weekend I came across a new video that was making the rounds across social media. It was, of course, put out by the Southern Poverty Law Center and was narrated by “Waco” Jim Cavanaugh. Waco Jim has spent over 30 years in and leading the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. He has been a part of some of our largest government overreaches we have seen in recent generations, including Ruby Ridge and Waco. Waco saw the death of over 80+ men, women, and children. Ruby Ridge saw an FBI HRT sniper shooting a mother with a child in her arms after U.S. Marshals had already shot her 14 year-old son in the back.

Jim was leadership through these actions and now he is again stoking the fire and seeking to further divide us. In this particular video, he speaks on the dangers of a movement of citizens that have come together to stand up against what they see as a government overreach. He begins by presenting the “standoff in Bunkerville, NV of 2014.” What he does not touch on is that the Bundys were literally one of the last families that were still able to make a living in that region through ranching. He also does not show the videos of the peaceful protests that led up to the people combining their First Amendment rights with their Second. This video linked here, clearly shows that the ranchers who came out to protest with the Bundys were specifically unarmed (at first).  It was not until a militarized law enforcement arm of the Bureau of Land Management brought in assault rifles, sniper rifles, attack dogs, and proceeded to tackle a grandmother, who had just survived cancer treatment, and a pregnant woman almost got mauled, that the patriots decided it may be in their best interests to be armed for the sake of self defense, to prevent another Waco-type incident.

I would like to note that it has never been those on the side of the patriots that have initiated violence.  At Ruby Ridge and Waco, government agents fired first, by shooting dogs, and then people.  The government initiated violence in Oregon, where LaVoy Finicum was killed at a road block.  No patriots shot at any government agents, nor at anyone else. The patriots at Bundy Ranch and at Burns, Oregon knew better than to shoot first, because to do so immediately escalates the situation to a deadly force situation. The patriots do not want violence, they just want their government to abide by its founding legal charter and obey their own law. In Oregon the people involved surrendered peacefully. In the video, Jim also mentions the Millers, a husband and wife that killed two Las Vegas Metro police officers in a Las Vegas Cici’s pizza restaurant six weeks after the Bundy situation, and he mentions that the Millers attended the Bundy Ranch protests.  He completely ignores the fact that the Millers were asked to leave by the patriots at the Bundys’ property once it was discovered that Jerad Miller was a felon, and the Millers were never part of the security operation there.  When the powers that be put out this type of propaganda we must do everything that we can to shine the light of truth onto them.

I must ask why is it that the SPLC only seems to direct it’s ire onto groups and movements that fall to the right side of the ideological spectrum. Where are their outcries about Black Lives Matter and other like-minded groups who riot, destroy property, and directly threaten law enforcement and incite others to commit violence against police? The SPLC has never left their Ivory Tower to come out and actually investigate these claims that they make of us all being racists who want to overthrow the government. Both of these claims are just plain false. Anyone who has spent any time with the patriot groups knows that they are comprised of many colors (for example, on our “About” page, you can see interviews with black Oath Keepers including footage of black Oath Keepers veterans at Bundy Ranch). In a recent documentary co-produced by the SPLC “Hate in America, A Town on Fire” they had the audacity to show an image of so called racists that included three friends of mine from Montana an Idaho.  One is Hispanic, one is Canadian and one, through marriage is the only “white” person in his family. But it does serve as a great illustration as to just how wrong the SPLC gets things.  I, for one, have never wanted to overthrow the government. I just want to see them do a much better job and follow the laws that our founders set forth, and in particular, the Constitution, which is the Supreme Law of the land!

This type of one sided video serves to further divide us along racial, political, and social lines. Make no mistake there is an agenda to divide us, because the powers-that-be know that we are much easier to control when we are fighting among ourselves. I implore all of you to reach out across socioeconomic lines and across blue lines. Take the time to get to know and listen to each other so that we might understand each other a little better as Americans. Dismiss the one sided propaganda.

NOTE FROM STEWART:  Please see my response to this SPLC hit piece here.

CATEGORIES: ALL, ALL-OATHKEEPER-POSTS,CPT-COMMUNITY-PREPAREDNESS-TEAMS,CURRENT EVENTS, FEATURED, OATHKEEPER-ARTICLES

TAGS: JASON VAN TATENHOVE, OATH KEEPERS,SPLC

California: Veto Gunmaggedon

HERE IT IS CALIFORNIA!

If you love this state and are tired of progressive anti-American usurpers raping and pillaging, now is the time to stand up!

THIS IS A REFERENDUM TO STOP THEM COLD!!

HERE’S YOUR CHANCE TO SAY NO TO TYRANNY! THE GOVERNMENT ANSWERS TO US NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. 

YOU HAVE A WAY TO STOP GUN GRABBING JERRY BROWN AND HIS COHORTS! 

DO NOT LET THEM STRIP US FROM THE RIGHT TO DEFEND OURSELVES NO MATTER HOW THEY CHRISTMAS WRAP IT!

“GUN CONTROL = TOTAL GUN CONFISCATION” 

JUST LIKE AUSTRALIA, PARIS, ENGLAND – AMERICA YOU ARE NEXT TO SUBJUGATE YOURSELVES IF YOU ALLOW THIS TO CONTINUE!

STOP THE SECOND AMENDMENT CRUCIFIXION NOW!!

FOLLOW THE LINKS BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN LOCALLY FIND A STORE THAT CARRIES ALL THE PETITIONS NECESSARY FOR YOU TO SIGN TO GET THIS DONE BEFORE THE DEADLINE OF OCTOBER 29, 2016!

LETS DO THIS CALIFORNIA!

YOU’VE GOT TO MOVE NOW! LET’S GO! GO! GO! PEOPLE!!

BY NRA-ILA STAFF | MONDAY, AUGUST 15, 2016

California: Veto Gunmaggedon

More

In July, after Governor Brown signed several anti-gun bills, a grassroots effort to refer the enacted legislation to the ballot was launched.  The petitions for that effort began distribution at locations across the state late last week with more locations becoming available every day.  To locate a petition in your area click HERE.

Referendum Process:

Bills that have been passed by the legislature and signed into the law by the Governor may be prohibited from becoming law through a successful referendum. In order to qualify a referendum for the ballot must be submitted within 90 days of the Governor’s signature; the proponent must 1) present the referendum to the secretary of state; 2) be certified by the secretary of state; and 3) collect the required number of signatures and return them to the respective counties prior to the deadline. If successful, the measures will appear on the ballot for a vote of the people.  To read an analysis of the referendum process and the challenges that it faces, please click here.  For a breakdown of deadlines and signature requirements please see below:

1788. (16-0004) Referendum to Overturn Law Redefining Assault Weapons.

Summary Date: 07/25/16 | Circulation Deadline: 09/29/16 | Signatures Required: 365,880

1789. (16-0005) Referendum to Overturn Law Prohibiting Possession of Large-Capacity Ammunition Magazines.
Summary Date: 07/25/16 | Circulation Deadline: 09/29/16 | Signatures Required: 365,880

1790. (16-0006) Referendum to Overturn Law Regulating Ammunition Sales.
Summary Date: 07/25/16 | Circulation Deadline: 09/29/16 | Signatures Required: 365,880

1791. (16-0007) Referendum to Overturn Law Redefining Assault Weapons.
Summary Date: 07/25/16 | Circulation Deadline: 09/29/16 | Signatures Required: 365,880

1792. (16-0008) Referendum to Overturn Law Establishing Criminal Penalties for Falsely Reporting Lost or Stolen Firearms.
Summary Date: 07/25/16 | Circulation Deadline: 09/29/16 | Signatures Required: 365,880

1793. (16-0009) Referendum to Overturn Law Regulating Loans of Firearms.
Summary Date: 07/25/16 | Circulation Deadline: 09/29/16 | Signatures Required: 365,880

1794. (16-0010) Referendum to Overturn Law Requiring Serial Numbers on Personally Manufactured or Assembled Firearms. Summary Date: 08/08/16 | Circulation Deadline: 10/20/16 | Signatures Required: 365,880

The success of Veto Gunmageddon effort depends on citizen involvement.  This is a multi-year process assuming the effort gathers enough valid signatures by the deadline.  

While gun rights organizations, including the NRA, were not responsible for initiating this citizen effort, we have provided legal assistance and will be making the petitions available at events across the state in conjunction with our state affiliate, the California Rifle and Pistol Association.

The NRA continues to fight for your Second Amendment Rights in California and will continue to pursue legal, political and legislative action to protect and preserve your Second Amendment rights.  For an update on California legal matters please click here, legislative updates visit www.nraila.org and political activities visitwww.nrapvf.org.

IN THIS ARTICLE

CALIFORNIA VETO GUNMAGEDDON

UPDATED: MASS PUBLIC SHOOTING IN FLORIDA OCCURRED IN ANOTHER GUN-FREE ZONE: 50+ DEAD IN A SHOOTING AT AN ORLANDO NIGHTCLUB

12 JUN , 2016 

gun-free-zone

From the UK Daily Mail:

The suspected Islamic extremist who killed about 50 people after taking party-goers hostage inside a gay club in Orlando has been identified.

Law enforcement sources have identified the shooter, who was wielding an assault rifle and a handgun, as US citizen Omar Mateen, from Port St. Lucie in Florida.

The gunman, who was born to Afghan parents, was carrying a suspicious device, possibly a suicide vest, when he opened fire on the dance floor inside Pulse in the early hours of this morning.

At least 50 people were killed and 53 others were injured in the shooting in the deadliest mass shooting in US history. . . .

On Friday singer Christina Grimmie’s was murdered in a gun-free zone in Orlando. Early this morning, at least 50 people were fatally shot at an Orlando night club — also a gun-free zone.  In both cases the media has yet to report that these attacks occurred where general citizens couldn’t defend themselves.

Since at least 1950, only slightly over 1 percent of mass public shootings have occurred where general citizens have been able to defend themselves. Police are extremely important in stopping crime, but even if they had been present at the time of the nightclub shooting, they may have had a very difficult time stopping the attack. Attackers will generally shoot first at any uniformed guards or officers who are present (the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris last year illustrates that point).  Alternatively, they will move on to another place without uniformed officers.

In this particular case the police only arrived on the scene after the attack occurred. That illustrates another point: it is simply impossible for the police to protect all possible targets.

It is hard to ignore how these mass public shooters consciously pick targets where they know victims won’t be able to defend themselves (here, here, and here).

Florida’s law on where people can carry guns is very clear:

From the relevant statute (790.06):

(12)(a) A license issued under this section does not authorize any person to openly carry a handgun or carry a concealed weapon or firearm into: . . .
12. Any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises, which portion of the establishment is primarily devoted to such purpose;

CCW in Bars

Among the recent states that allow permitted concealed handguns in places that get more than 50 percent of their revenue from alcohol are:Georgia (2014), Louisiana (2014), North Dakota (2015), North Carolina(2014), Ohio (2011), South Carolina (2014), and Tennessee (2009).  Besides Florida, other states that prohibit them are: Illinois, Kentucky, Nebraska,New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming.    However, some states such as California issue so few permits that they might as well be banning be banning them in bars.  There is no evidence of problems despite people being able to carry in states that allow people to carry in bars.  Despite the many millions of permit holders in these states, no examples are offered of drunk patrons with permits causing trouble.

Many of the states that allow one to carry a gun in a bar still prohibit you to consume alcohol.  Here are some other state laws: Alaska, Idaho, Michigan(allows you to open carry if you have a concealed handgun permit), and Montana (allows you to openly carry a gun into a bar), and Oregon.

People are allowed to carry in restaurants that don’t get more than 50% of their revenue from alcohol in all the states (again, Montana only allows you to do so as open carry with a permit).  Again, there is no evidence of problems despite people being able to carry in places that serve alcohol across the entire country.

Media discussions today on assault weapons, background checks, but not relevant to the case here.  But the easiest thing for these reporters to check and know for sure, that this was another attack in a gun free zone, is never mentioned once anywhere in the media.  Hillary Clinton and President Obama both used the attack to call for more gun control.  But there is no explanation on how any of Clinton’s proposals would accomplish this:

“We need to keep guns like the ones used last night out of the hands of terrorists or other violent criminals,” Clinton said. “This is the deadliest mass shooting in the history of the United States and it reminds us once more that weapons of war have no place on our streets.” . . .

The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence has many errors on state laws regarding where one can carry.  This article in the New York Times was wrong about many state laws at the time that it was written.

gun free zones

Katie Couric Spent almost 4 hours interviewing John Lott on film for her new Gun-Control Movie But Didn’t include Any of Lott’s Interview in the Movie – Crime Prevention Research CenterCrime Prevention Research Center

Post by John Lott: After over two hours of pre-interviews with Kristin Lazure, a Producer at Atlas Films, I was asked to travel to New York City to do an interview with Katie Couric for her new movie.  As Kristin put it on July 14, 2015: “we are still very much interested in interviewing you to give the film …

Source: Katie Couric Spent almost 4 hours interviewing John Lott on film for her new Gun-Control Movie But Didn’t include Any of Lott’s Interview in the Movie – Crime Prevention Research CenterCrime Prevention Research Center