DELAWARE BATTLE AGAINST MURDER OF BABIES & PERVERSION~THE “NUCLEAR OPTION”?~ABORTION & TRANSGENDER ACTIVISTS PUSH FOR AMENDING DELAWARE’S CONSTITUTION~VOTE TODAY
|
|||||||||||||
|
Rather Expose Them Christian News Blog
A WordPress Blog-THE CHURCH MILITANT Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse. ALL CONTENT FROM HTTPS://RATHEREXPOSETHEM.BLOGSPOT.COM MOVED TO THIS NEW BLOG, MAY 2020
|
|||||||||||||
|
West Chester, PA Anti Gun and Anti Freedom Rally 2018
He exclaimed that we need the government armed to protect the public from people like me. Maybe it was the hoodie I was wearing, who knows?
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning, but without understanding.”
Ban Rifles Sign West Chester, PA Anti Gun and Anti Freedom Rally 2018Guns Are Death Sign West Chester, PA Anti Gun and Anti Freedom Rally 2018
New JerseyNational Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)
A.1217 by Assemblyman Jack McKeon (D) creates extreme risk protection orders. The bill has serious due process issues, including no pre-seizure notification. Ex parte hearings deprive the accused of their right to be heard and make their case.A.2757 by Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald (D) is a redundant bill that requires background checks on private transactions. This bill is simply political gimmickry as private transactions in New Jersey already require a background check through the FID card process. This bill would do nothing except add another layer of bureaucracy and fees.A.2758 by Assemblyman Greenwald (D) codifies the “justifiable need” standard for issuance of concealed carry permits. The bill is designed to strike a death blow to concealed carry in a state that already makes it virtually impossible to obtain a carry permit.A.2761 by Assemblyman Greenwald (D) would ban magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. The bill was amended last week in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. After realizing that the bill would most likely result in litigation, the Committee amended the bill to allow permanent blocking of already owned magazines. However, the amendment does not remove our strenuous opposition to the bill.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (WDTV) — Governor Jim Justice has signed a bill to allow people to keep firearms locked in their vehicles while parked on their employer’s property.
The purpose of this bill is to create the “Business Liability Protection Act”. The bill includes the right to limit possession of firearms on certain premises and definitions. It also provides for misdemeanor criminal offense and penalty. It prohibits employers from certain specific actions against a person when that person possesses a firearm legally, including a condition of employment. The bill provides a duty of care of public and private employers and provides for immunity from liability. The bill authorizes the Attorney General to enforce this statute, including the right to sue or seek injunctive relief; and seek civil fines.
In the Senate, legislation that would stop private businesses and associations from prohibiting guns in vehicles parked on their property advanced to passage stage on Friday, after the Senate adopted two amendments Thursday (HB 4187).One change requires that firearms in vehicles be hidden out of view of passers-by. The second clarifies that the right to have firearms in vehicles does not apply to vehicles owned or leased to a private business or association.The amendments were adopted on a voice vote, without debate.
Swindol appealed, and the Fifth Circuit has now certified the following question to this Court:
Whether in Mississippi an employer may be liable for a wrongful discharge of an employee for storing a firearm in a locked vehicle on company property in a manner that is consistent with [Mississippi Code] Section 45-9-55.Swindol v. Aurora Flight Sciences Corp., 805 F.3d 516, 523 (5th Cir. 2015). The Fifth Circuit also concluded that it “would benefit from [this Court’s] analysis of whether Section 45-9-55(5) bars” Swindol’s suit. Id. at 522.
The Snitches in Your Kids’ Dental Office
Hoyumpa wrote: “Smiles 4 Keeps bullies the parents, controls the care behind closed doors, and turns parents into villains…and I will not stand for it anymore!!!”
Brett Darken wrote: “Anyone familiar with ‘family court,’ DCF, state probate and guardianship courts know well this story. In any other context, it would be considered a threat, coercion and intimidation under RICO laws. But because it’s the government, it’s legal.”
Skenazy drills down to the core: “The issue here is how easy it is to drag a family into an abuse investigation, and how hard it is for the family, like an impacted molar, to get itself extracted.”
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Thank you, Chancellor Merkel! Celebrate diversity!“Woman, 24, fights for life after being ambushed and stabbed by three child Syrian refugees who followed her after arguing with her at a supermarket in Germany,” by Allan Hall, MailOnline, March 26, 2018 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):A 24-year-old woman is fighting for her life after being stabbed during a fight with a group of Syrian child refugees near Hanover, Germany.The woman and a friend had gotten into an argument with two boys, aged 13 and 14, in a supermarket in the small town of Burgwedel near Hanover on Saturday evening.The pair met the teens again on their way home, at which point they had been joined by a 17-year-old and the argument between the woman’s 25-year-old friend and the Syrians escalated.Local media reports that the 24-year-old had stepped in to calm the combatants down, when she was stabbed by the 17-year-old.All three teenagers fled the scene, but were soon caught by police.The 17-year-old appeared before a court on Sunday and has been charged with attempted murder….
Seven men have been found guilty of grooming and raping underage girls aged 13 to 17, plying them with drink and drugs and abusing them at sex “parties” and in a van know as the “shag wagon”.The seven-man grooming gang was described as “predatory and cynical” by a judge…
It keeps on unfolding: more and more cases of obscene, cruel abuses of UK girls and still, there has been no global outcry to match the enormity of the behavior of the Muslim rape gangs. In fact, the Muslim rape gangs are still being described by the British press as “grooming gangs”; the perpetrators are referred to as “Asian.” Meanwhile, the BBC has referred to this particular Muslim rape gang as “Oxford men.”
This group of men subjected them to an almost unimaginable level of cruelty and sexual abuse over a significant period of time.
Seven men have been found guilty of grooming and raping underage girls aged 13 to 17, plying them with drink and drugs and abusing them at sex “parties” and in a van know as the “shag wagon”.
The seven-man grooming gang was described as “predatory and cynical” by a judge as the jury announced their decision on Friday following a five-month trial at Oxford Crown Court.The men, aged between 37 and 48, denied what prosecutors described as “sexual exploitation on a massive scale” — but were found guilty of charges including multiple counts of rape, indecent assault, false imprisonment, and supplying drugs.Reporting on the gang of what the BBC described as “Oxford men” was previously restricted, and two men involved in the trial still cannot be named for legal reasons.The guilty men were named as Assad Hussain, 37, of Morrell Avenue; Moinul Islam, 41, of Wykeham Crescent; Raheem Ahmed, 40, of Starwort Path; Kamran Khan, 36, of Kersington Crescent; Kameer Iqbal, 39, of Dashwood Avenue; Alladitta Yousaf, 48, of Bodley Road; and Khalid Hussain, 38, of Ashurst Way.Two others, Saboor Abdul and Haji Khan, were acquitted of all charges.Six of the attackers were from Oxford and one from Bolton, Thames Valley Police said. Their five “vulnerable female victims” were aged 13 to 17 when they were abused from 1998 and 2005.“Systematic and widespread grooming, that is what this case has revealed,” remarked Judge Peter Ross, who presided over the trial…..“This has been a lengthy and difficult investigation undertaken by Thames Valley Police and the Elmore Team, which has taken place over a significant period of time,” commented Senior Investigating Officer Detective Chief Inspector Mark Glover, of the Thames Valley Police Major Crime Unit.“These convictions would not have been possible without the incredible bravery and ongoing support of the victims.“This group of men subjected them to an almost unimaginable level of cruelty and sexual abuse over a significant period of time.“To have come through that trauma, and to have been able to help and support us throughout our investigation is a testament to the strength of their characters.“I know that nothing will be able to change the damage done to these women’s lives by this group of men, but I hope that these convictions will help them to move forward with their lives.”……
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Official White House Fact SheetPresident Donald J Trump : Sanctuary Cities Undermine Law Enforcement & Endanger Our CommunitiesWhiteHouse.govWashington DC –-(Ammoland.com)- Sanctuary jurisdictions obstruct Federal immigration enforcement efforts and put law enforcement at greater risk.
NY TIMES OP-ED:
Left intentionally unsaid is that, per a prior Supreme Court, the militia is “expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time [and] “the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear … ordinary military equipment … that … could contribute to the common defense.”USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “Repeal the Second Amendment,” retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens declared in a Tuesday “op-ed” in The New York Times. It’s actually the third time “the newspaper of record” has hosted such sentiments in recent months, and they’re hardly alone.
“For over 200 years after the adoption of the Second Amendment, it was uniformly understood as not placing any limit on either federal or state authority to enact gun control legislation,” Stevens claims.
“No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give the Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under a general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any pursuit of an inordinate power either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”
“Overturning that decision via a constitutional amendment to get rid of the Second Amendment would be simple and would do more to weaken the N.R.A.’s ability to stymie legislative debate and block constructive gun control legislation than any other available option,” Stevens declares.
“The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it ‘shall not be infringed.’ As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, ‘[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed…’”
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms — when serving in the militia — shall not be infringed.”
No.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- Sen. Bryan Townsend (D-Newark) introduced a new proposed ban on most semiautomatic guns in the Delaware General Assembly on Thursday.Townsend based the bill on the infamous Maryland Firearm Safety Act of 2013 (“FSA”) which banned most modern sporting rifles. Maryland Democrats used the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut to push the bill through their legislator. It appears that the anti-gun politicians in Delaware are using the Parkland Florida shooting as an excuse to introduce the bill and push it throughThe bill would ban 60 specific makes and models of rifles, shotguns, and “assault pistols”. The law goes further and would prohibit any gun that Delaware deems a “copycat weapon.” The legislation would give Delaware almost unlimited power to determine which firearm would fall into this category.The bill would also prevent the transfer, sale, or manufacture of these firearms. Any firearms companies located in Delaware will have to shut down or leave the state. There is a grandfather clause for citizens that already own these rifles.The bill states that it is necessary for the safety of the general public, as well as members of Delaware's law-enforcement community. The legislation falsely asserts that these firearms are used disproportionately to their ownership in mass shootings and the murders of police. It also claims that the banning of these weapons would make criminals less dangerous.In one part of the bill makes the absurd claim that the differences between semi-automatic firearms and automatic firearms are slight. It then makes the claim that semi-automatic guns are more lethal than automatic guns. It even goes as far as to ban any rifle that looks like an M16.“These are not firearms used in home defense like handguns or for hunting like other types of rifles,” Townsend said in a statement. “They are derived from the battlefield, and their purpose is to kill in large numbers.”The bill does acknowledge that some people do use these would-be banned firearms for self-defense. It then goes further and states that most people choose other guns for self-defense. It uses that fact to try to override the self-defense argument.I guess they already forgot when Stephen Wileford used his AR-15 to stop a church shooter.Townsend also wrongly claims that so-called “assault weapons bullets” can penetrate standard home construction and car doors while handgun rounds cannot. The bill also states that the 5.56 round can easily penetrate body armor. These false statements show that Townsend is either grossly misinformed or he is dishonest. Anti-gun groups have used this tactic in gun control bills in other states.Townsend also wrote in the legislation that modern sporting rifles give criminals a “military-style advantage” over law enforcement. Most officers have access to AR15s along with training on the platform, and statistically, most criminals do not use AR15s in crimes. Any advantage would be canceled out for these reasons.The bill sites the fourth circuit court upholding the Constitutionality of the Maryland law as the Constitutional justification for the act. The Supreme Court of The United States refused to hear the appeal of the decision of the fourth circuit court.Gun rights groups have rejected this far-reaching law that would even ban throwing stars.“There is no room for compromise or amendments on this,” Jeff Hague, president of Delaware State Sportsmen's Association told Delaware Online. “This is bad legislation and we will not support it in any manner.”It will be interesting to see how the debate on this bill plays out in the Delaware General Assembly. The bill is full of misconceptions and false information. Delaware gun owners should contact their representatives. The contact information for the Delaware General Assembly can be found here.About John CrumpJohn is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%'ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on the history of the patriot movement and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss or at www.crumpy.com.____________________________________________________________________Governor Carney, Senator Townsend, Representative Longhurst Announce Assault Weapons Legislation
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
DOVER, Del. – Governor John Carney, Senator Bryan Townsend, and House Majority Leader Valerie Longhurst on Thursday announced legislation to ban the sale, purchase, transfer, and certain possession of assault-style weapons in Delaware. The legislation will be introduced by Senator Townsend in the Delaware Senate on Thursday. Representative Longhurst is the legislation’s prime sponsor in the Delaware House of Representatives.The legislation would prohibit the sale and transfer of specific firearms in Delaware, which are listed in the legislation, as well as copycat weapons that meet certain criteria. It also would prohibit the transportation of assault-style weapons across state lines into Delaware, subject to certain exceptions. The bill would not ban possession of any weapons purchased legally before the legislation’s effective date. It would impose certain restrictions on where lawfully owned assault weapons may be possessed and transported. The legislation would allow possession in a lawful owner’s home, their place of business, a shooting range, and during an exhibition, display, or educational exhibit.Licensed firearms dealers and manufacturers would be permitted to sell or transfer any assault-style weapons in their inventory as of the effective date of the legislation to a licensed firearm dealer in another state or to an individual purchaser in another state through a licensed firearms dealer. Among other individuals and entities, the bill includes exceptions for law enforcement officers, military personnel, and certain testing and repair facilities.Governor Carney, Senator Townsend, and Representative Longhurst issued the following statements:“As we have seen in Parkland, Las Vegas and in many other horrific tragedies across our country, military-style weapons can be used to carry out catastrophic acts of violence. These weapons allow those intent on doing harm to outgun members of law enforcement, and they have no place on the streets of our neighborhoods,” said Governor John Carney. “It’s true that we need a national approach to confront the threat of gun violence. I believe President Trump and Congressional leaders should take action. But we cannot wait to do what’s right in Delaware. This is important legislation that will make our state safer – and I urge members of the General Assembly in both parties to act quickly and send this bill to my desk as soon as possible. Thank you to Senator Townsend and Representative Longhurst for their partnership, and their leadership, on this issue.”“The status quo on gun violence isn’t working. Delaware has made important progress in recent years, but we can — and must — do more,” said Senator Bryan Townsend. “Military-style assault weapons are not protected by the Second Amendment. They have limited or no practical use for hunting or home defense, yet they are the weapon of choice in mass shootings and pose additional risk to law enforcement. It’s irresponsible to make them available to the general public on-demand. We owe it to our students, our families, and our law enforcement to keep weapons of war where they belong: on the battlefield, not on store shelves.”“We have an obligation to always look for ways to make our communities safer. Having fewer assault-style weapons on our streets is one way we can accomplish that goal,” said House Majority Leader Valerie Longhurst. “The rallying cry across the country is being repeated over and over – enough is enough, and more than half of gun owners agree that we need to step up and address these firearms. These firearms are massively deadly weapons and should not be sold any longer.”________________________________________________________THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE SECOND AMENDMENT LISTED IN BILL:
SPONSOR: Sen. Townsend & Rep. Longhurst & Rep. Brady & Rep. Potter Sens. Henry, Marshall, McDowell, Sokola; Reps. Baumbach, Bentz, Heffernan, Kowalko, Lynn, B. ShortDELAWARE STATE SENATE149th GENERAL ASSEMBLYSENATE BILL NO. 163AN ACT TO AMEND THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO DEADLY WEAPONS.BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE:Section 1. Amend Subchapter VII, Chapter 5, Title 11 of the Delaware Code by making deletions as shown by strike through and insertions as shown by underline as follows:§§ 1462 -1469. [Reserved.]§ 1462. Manufacture, sale, transport, transfer, purchase, receipt, or possession of assault weapons.(a) Definitions. - For purposes of this section:(1) “Assault long gun” means any of the following or a copy, regardless of the producer or manufacturer:a. American Arms Spectre da Semiautomatic carbine.b. AK-47 in all forms.c. Algimec AGM-1 type semi-auto.d. AR 100 type semi-auto.e. AR 180 type semi-auto.f. Argentine L.S.R. semi-auto.g. Australian Automatic Arms SAR type semi-auto.h. Auto-Ordnance Thompson M1 and 1927 semi-automatics.i. Barrett light .50 cal. semi-auto.j. Beretta AR70 type semi-auto.k. Bushmaster semi-auto rifle.l . Calico models M-100 and M-900.m. CIS SR 88 type semi-auto.n. Claridge HI TEC C-9 carbines.o. Colt AR-15, CAR-15, and all imitations except Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle.p. Daewoo MAX 1 and MAX 2, aka AR 100, 110C, K-1, and K-2.q. Dragunov Chinese made semi-auto.r. Famas semi-auto (.223 caliber).s. Feather AT-9 semi-auto.t. FN LAR and FN FAL assault rifle.u. FNC semi-auto type carbine.v. F.I.E./Franchi LAW 12 and SPAS 12 assault shotgun.w. Steyr-AUG-SA semi-auto.x. Galil models AR and ARM semi-auto.y. Heckler and Koch HK-91 A3, HK-93 A2, HK-94 A2 and A3.z. Holmes model 88 shotgun.aa. Avtomat Kalashnikov semiautomatic rifle in any format.bb. Manchester Arms "Commando" MK-45, MK-9.cc. Mandell TAC-1 semi-auto carbine.dd. Mossberg model 500 Bullpup assault shotgun.ee. Sterling Mark 6.ff. P.A.W.S. carbine.gg. Ruger mini-14 tactical rifle.hh. SIG 550/551 assault rifle (.223 caliber).ii. SKS with detachable magazine.jj. AP-74 Commando type semi-auto.kk. Springfield Armory BM-59, SAR-48, G3, SAR-3, M-21 sniper rifle, and M1A, excluding the M1 Garand.ll . Street sweeper assault type shotgun.mm. Striker 12 assault shotgun in all formats.nn. Unique F11 semi-auto type.oo. Daewoo USAS 12 semi-auto shotgun.pp. UZI 9mm carbine or rifle.qq. Valmet M-76 and M-78 semi-auto.rr. Weaver Arms “Nighthawk” semi-auto carbine.ss. Wilkinson Arms 9mm semi-auto “Terry”.(2) “Assault pistol” means any of the following or a copy, regardless of the producer or manufacturer:a. AA Arms AP-9 pistol.b. Beretta 93R pistol.c. Bushmaster pistol.d. Claridge HI-TEC pistol.e. D Max Industries pistol.f. EKO Cobra pistol.g. Encom MK-IV, MP-9, or MP-45 pistol.h. Heckler and Koch MP5K, MP7, SP-89, or VP70 pistol.i. Holmes MP-83 pistol.j. Ingram MAC 10/11 pistol and variations, including the Partisan Avenger and the SWD Cobray.k . Intratec TEC-9/DC-9 pistol in any centerfire variation.l . P.A.W.S. type pistol.m. Skorpion pistol.n. Spectre double action pistol (Sile, F.I.E., Mitchell).o. Stechkin automatic pistol.p. Steyer tactical pistol.q. UZI pistol.r. Weaver Arms Nighthawk pistol.s. Wilkinson “Linda” pistol.(3) “Assault weapon” means any of the following:a. An assault long gun.b. An assault pistol.c. A copycat weapon.(4)a. “Copycat weapon” means any of the following:1. A semiautomatic centerfire rifle that can accept a detachable magazine and has any 2 of the following:A. A folding stock.B. A grenade launcher or flare launcher.C. A flash suppressor.2. A semiautomatic centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.3. A semiautomatic centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 29 inches.4. A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.5. A semiautomatic shotgun that has a folding stock.6. A shotgun with a revolving cylinder.b. “Copycat weapon” does not include an assault long gun or an assault pistol.(5) “Detachable magazine” means an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from a firearm without requiring disassembly of the firearm action or without the use of a tool, including a bullet or cartridge.(6) “Flash suppressor” means a device that functions, or is intended to function, to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter’s field of vision.(7) “Licensed firearms dealer” means any person licensed as a deadly weapons dealer under Chapter 9 of Title 24 and 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq.(8) “Qualified retired law-enforcement officer” means as defined in § 1441B(c) of this title.(9) “Shooting range” means any land or structure used and operated in accordance with all applicable laws and ordinances for the shooting of targets for training, education, practice, recreation, or competition.(b) Applicability. - This section does not apply to any of the following:(1) The following individuals, if acting within the scope of official business:a. Personnel of the United States government or a unit of that government.b. Members of the armed forces of the United States or of the National Guard.c. A law-enforcement officer.(2) An assault weapon modified to render it permanently inoperative.(3) Possession, importation, manufacture, receipt for manufacture, shipment for manufacture, storage, purchases, sales, and transport to or by a licensed firearms dealer or manufacturer who does any of the following:a. Provides or services an assault weapon for a law-enforcement agency of this State or for personnel exempted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.b. Acts to sell or transfer an assault weapon to a licensed firearm dealer in another state or to an individual purchaser in another state through a licensed firearms dealer.c. Acts to return to a customer in another state an assault weapon transferred to the licensed firearms dealer or manufacturer under the terms of a warranty or for repair.(4) Organizations that are required or authorized by federal law governing their specific business or activity to maintain assault weapons.(5) The receipt of an assault weapon by inheritance, and possession of the inherited assault weapon, if the decedent lawfully possessed the assault weapon and the person inheriting the assault weapon is not otherwise a person prohibited under § 1448 of this title.(6) The receipt of an assault weapon by a personal representative of an estate for purposes of exercising the powers and duties of a personal representative of an estate.(7) Possession by a qualified retired law-enforcement officer who is not otherwise prohibited from receiving an assault weapon if either of the following applies:a. The assault weapon is sold or transferred to the qualified retired law-enforcement officer by the law-enforcement agency on retirement.b. The assault weapon was purchased or obtained by the qualified retired law-enforcement officer for official use with the law-enforcement agency before retirement.(8) Possession or transport by an armored car guard, as defined in § 1302 of Title 24, if the armored car guard is acting within the scope of employment with an armored car agency, as defined under § 1302 of Title 24, and is licensed under Chapter 13 of Title 24.(9) Possession, receipt, and testing by, or shipping to or from any of the following:a. An ISO 17025 accredited, National Institute of Justice-approved ballistics testing laboratory.b. A facility or entity that manufactures or provides research and development testing, analysis, or engineering for personal protective equipment or vehicle protection systems.(c) Prohibitions. - Except as provided in subsection (d) of this section, it is unlawful for a person to do any of the following:(1) Transport an assault weapon into this State.(2) Manufacture, sell, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, receive, or possess an assault weapon.(d) Exceptions. -(1) A licensed firearms dealer may continue to do all of the following with an assault weapon that the licensed firearms dealer lawfully possessed on or before [the effective date of this Act]:a. Possess the assault weapon.b. Sell the assault weapon or offer the assault weapon for sale. But, the licensed firearms dealer may only sell the assault weapon or offer the assault weapon for sale as permitted under paragraph (b)(3)b. of this section.c. Transfer the assault weapon. But, the licensed firearms dealer may only transfer the assault weapon as permitted by paragraph (b)(3)b. or (b)(3)c. of this section or by paragraph (d)(2)b. of this section.(2)a. A licensed firearms dealer may take possession of an assault weapon from a person who lawfully possessed the assault weapon before [the effective date of this Act] for the purposes of servicing or repairing the assault weapon.b. A licensed firearms dealer may transfer possession of an assault weapon received under paragraph (d)(2)a. of this section for purposes of accomplishing service or repair of the assault weapon.(3) A person who lawfully possessed, had a purchase order for, or completed an application to purchase an assault weapon before [the effective date of this Act], may possess and transport the assault weapon on or after [the effective date of this Act] only under the following circumstances:a. At that person’s residence, place of business, or other property owned by that person, or on property owned by another person with the owner’s express permission.b. While on the premises of a shooting range.c. While attending any exhibition, display, or educational project that is about firearms and that is sponsored by, conducted under the auspices of, or approved by a law-enforcement agency or a nationally or state recognized entity that fosters proficiency in, or promotes education about, firearms.d. While transporting the assault weapon between any of the places set forth in this this paragraph (d)(3) of this section, or to any licensed firearms dealer for servicing or repair under paragraph (d)(2) of this section, if the person transports the assault weapon as follows:1. If the assault weapon is transported outside of a motor vehicle, it must not be concealed from public view.2. If the assault weapon is transported inside a motor vehicle, it must be unloaded and must be kept in one of the following ways:A. In the trunk of the vehicle.B. In a case or other container that renders the assault weapon inaccessible to the operator of or any passenger in the vehicle.(4) A person may transport an assault weapon to or from any of the following:a. An ISO 17025 accredited, National Institute of Justice-approved ballistics testing laboratory.b. A facility or entity that manufactures or provides research and development testing, analysis, or engineering for personal protective equipment or vehicle protection systems.(e) Penalty. - A violation of this section is a class F felony for a first offense and a class E felony for any subsequent offense within 10 years of a prior offense.(f) Disposal. - A law-enforcement agency in possession of a person’s assault weapon as a result of an arrest under this section shall dispose of the assault weapon under the process established for deadly weapons and ammunition under § 2311 of this title following the person’s adjudication of delinquency or conviction under this section or by the person’s agreement to forfeit the assault weapon under an agreement to plead delinquent or guilty to another offense.§§ 1463 – 1469. [Reserved.]Section 2. Amend § 1457, Title 11 of the Delaware Code by making deletions as shown by strike through and insertions as shown by underline as follows:§ 1457. Possession of a weapon in a Safe School and Recreation Zone; class D, E, or F felony; class A or B misdemeanor.(a) Any person who commits any of the offenses described in subsection (b) of this section, or any juvenile who possesses a firearm or other deadly weapon, and does so while in or on a "Safe School and Recreation Zone" shall be guilty of the crime of possession of a weapon in a Safe School and Recreation Zone.(b) The underlying offenses in Title 11 shall be:(1) Section 1442. — Carrying a concealed deadly weapon; class G felony; class D felony.(2) Section 1444. — Possessing a destructive weapon; class E felony.(3) Section 1446. — Unlawfully dealing with a switchblade knife; unclassified misdemeanor.(4) Section 1448. — Possession and purchase of deadly weapons by persons prohibited; class F felony.(5) Section 1452. — Unlawfully dealing with knuckles-combination knife; class B misdemeanor.(6) Section 1453. — Unlawfully dealing with martial arts throwing star; class B misdemeanor.(7) Section 1462. – Manufacture, sale, transport, transfer, purchase, receipt, or possession of assault weapons.Section 3. If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the Act which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application; and, to that end, the provisions of this Act are declared to be severable.Section 4. This Act takes effect 60 days after its enactment into law.SYNOPSISThis Act prohibits the manufacture, sale, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, receipt, possession, or transport of assault weapons in Delaware, subject to certain exceptions. One exception relevant to individuals is that the Act does not prohibit the possession and transport of firearms that were lawfully possessed or fully applied for before the effective date of this Act; although for these firearms there are certain restrictions relating to their possession and transport after the effective date of this Act.This Act is based on the Firearm Safety Act of 2013 (“FSA”) passed in Maryland in the wake of the tragic slaughtering of children on December 14, 2012, at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The FSA’s assault weapons ban was upheld as constitutional on February 21, 2017, by the full membership of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in the case of Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114 (4th Cir. 2017).The names Newtown, Aurora, San Bernardino, Orlando, Las Vegas, and Parkland, among others, have become synonymous with tragic killing of innocent, unsuspecting Americans of all ages and backgrounds, amidst a framework of federal and state laws that have permitted the purchase of weapons designed for the battlefield — not for our schools, our theaters, our places of worship, or our homes.Safety — both for the general public, as well as members of Delaware's law-enforcement community — is the objective of this Act, as it was for the FSA. And, as with the FSA, a primary goal of this Act is to reduce the availability of assault weapons so that when a criminal acts, he or she does so with a less dangerous weapon and less severe consequences.Relying on United States Supreme Court precedent from District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), as well as the holdings of its sister circuits, the full Fourth Circuit concluded that the assault weapons banned by the FSA are not protected by the Second Amendment. The Fourth Circuit was convinced that the banned assault weapons are among those arms that are “like” “M-16 rifles” — “weapons that are most useful in military service” — which the Heller Court singled out as being beyond the Second Amendment’s reach.The Fourth Circuit concluded that Maryland had presented extensive uncontroverted evidence demonstrating that the assault weapons outlawed by the FSA are exceptionally lethal weapons of war. The Fourth Circuit also concluded that the evidence showed the difference between the fully automatic and semiautomatic versions of military-style weapons is slight. Further evidence considered by the Fourth Circuit that motivates this Act is as follows:(1) Like their fully automatic counterparts, the banned assault weapons are firearms designed for the battlefield, for the soldier to be able to shoot a large number of rounds across a battlefield at a high rate of speed, and that their design results in a capability for lethality — more wounds, more serious, in more victims — far beyond that of other firearms in general, including other semiautomatic guns.(2) The banned assault weapons have been used disproportionately to their ownership in mass shootings and the murders of law-enforcement officers.(3) The banned assault weapons further pose a heightened risk to civilians in that rounds from assault weapons have the ability to easily penetrate most materials used in standard home construction, car doors, and similar materials, and that criminals armed with the banned assault weapons possess a “military-style advantage” in firefights with law-enforcement officers, as such weapons allow criminals to effectively engage law-enforcement officers from great distances and their rounds easily pass through the soft body armor worn by most law-enforcement officers.(4) Although self-defense is a conceivable use of the banned assault weapons, most individuals choose to keep other firearms for that purpose.(5) Prohibitions against assault weapons will promote public safety by reducing the availability of those armaments to mass shooters and other criminals, by diminishing their especial threat to law-enforcement officers, and by hindering their unintentional misuse by civilians.(6) In many situations, the semiautomatic fire of an assault weapon is more accurate and lethal than the automatic fire.Finding this evidence and these conclusions by the Fourth Circuit to be strongly persuasive of the applicable framework of constitutional rights, and firmly believing that promoting the safety of the Delaware public and Delaware law-enforcement is a paramount function of the Delaware General Assembly, Delaware legislators file this Act in the name of public safety and with adherence to core constitutional principles.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research
purposes:
The following testimony is by Brian Snider bksnider@gmail.com -
SEE ALSO:
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research
purposes:
“Choose your parents wisely,” goes the quip attributed to Bertrand Russell. This is especially good advice today given a new trend: selecting “gender-neutral” baby names for newborns out of the belief that “gender is fluid.”Oh, the new appellations aren’t as bad as some perhaps drug-inspired inspirations, baby names such as “Rocket Zot,” “Dzyre,” “Moo,” “Audio Science” and “Bronx Mowgli.” (Pro tip: If you want to saddle a being with a bizarre name, buy a pet potbelly pig.) But they’re certainly more common, with unisex names such as Royal, Charlie, Salem, Skyler, Justice, and Oakley increasingly chosen by parents imbued with politically correct “transgender” notions, reports the AP.The AP informs that unisex-type names are now more heavily represented in the Social Security Administration’s list of its top 1,000 names and are especially popular, quite predictably, among Millennial parents.For example, baby-name site Nameberry.com “analyzed the 2016 Social Security Administration data into a top 50 androgynous name list focused on those with heavy [boy/girl] splits,” writes the AP. “Charlie came in at 50-50, followed by Finley at 58 percent for girls and 42 percent for boys. Skyler was in third place (54-46), Justice was fourth (52-48) and Royal was fifth (42-58).”“Rounding out the Top 10 were Lennon (50-41), Oakley (52-48), Armani (46-54), Azariah (55-45) and Landry (53-47),” the news organ continued.Providing a relevant anecdote, the AP also relates:“We chose a gender-neutral name, Riley, for my daughter,” said Lori Kinkler, a psychologist in San Antonio, Texas. “We knew her sex, but gender is fluid and yet to be determined. Of all the difficulties faced by those who live beyond, or across, the binary, we didn’t want name-changing to be one of them.... I like that she feels she has options and knows she’ll be accepted by us no matter what.” Riley is 3.To properly interpret this, note that Kinkler is viewing “sex” as the biological reality of being male or female and “gender” as being one’s perception of what he is, which is the current mainstream position of “transgender” activists (tune in tomorrow, though, for the latest theory).Of course, “gender” is fluid insofar as it may not align with the given person’s “sex”; what’s often missed today, tragically, is that this is called “delusion.”A more basic delusion, however, is that humans actually have gender. Used mainly in reference to word categories (i.e., masculine, feminine, and neuter) up until relatively recently, the term was widely applied to people by sexual “devolutionaries” who needed language to make delusive states of being sound merely like alternative lifestyles.Now names reflecting this are being popularized, too. While the AP points out that unisex appellations are sometimes embraced simply because they sound “cool,” the idea when they’re chosen for ideological reasons is that kids shouldn’t be put in a “gender straitjacket.”In the past I’ve reported on children raised in “sex neutral” ways, examples being “Pop” in Sweden(a nation with a “gender neutral” preschool), “Storm” in Canada, and Sasha in Britain. In some cases the parents won’t even divulge the sex of the child and refrain from using sex-specific pronouns when describing him for fear of provoking “gender specific” influence. As Sasha’s mother, Beck Laxton, put it, “I wanted to avoid all that stereotyping. Stereotypes seem fundamentally stupid. Why would you want to slot people into boxes?” This reflects philosophical juvenility.Like so many confused parents, box-averse Laxton was on a quest to “let her kid just be a kid.” All right, but then why put him in the “kid” box?As I explained in 2012, “I remember a cute story about the discovery of the doodlings of a seven-year-old medieval Russian boy named Onfim. In one picture, he drew himself as some kind of monster and included the caption, ‘I am a wild beast.’ This is a common childhood fantasy, but should we point to disturbed people such as ‘Wolfie Blackheart’ the ‘werewolf’ and conclude that perhaps we shouldn’t impose species-oriented norms on children?”Note here that just as psychologists define “gender dysphoria” (GD) — strong and persistent feelings that you’re a member of one sex stuck in the opposite sex’s body — so do they define “species dysphoria” (SD), the sense that you’re really an animal stuck in a human body. And there’s just as much evidence that SD is an actual biological condition (as opposed to a delusion) as there is that GD is: none.I continued:Clearly, we put a little human in a human “box” not because of some arbitrary “social construct” but because he was born in a human body, and it’s far healthier to socialize him as a human than a ferret. In the same way that we cultivate a dog’s innate qualities by training him as a dog, it is how we cultivate a child’s human capacities and prepare him for his role as a human.The point is this: The idea that you could raise a child and not place him in a “box” is a silly fantasy. We instill norms and ideas about status in children when we put clothes on them, tell them they’re human and American, teach them language and manners and to wash and brush their teeth, laugh at some behaviors and frown upon others, choose some forms of entertainment but avoid others, and when we do a thousand other things. And insofar as the parents don’t serve the role of instilling norms, the village will.So we place a boy in a boy box not because of some arbitrary social construct, but because he was born in a boy’s body. And this brings us to the idea that, as Laxton believes, sex stereotyping limits a child’s “potential.” You see, there is a different theory — in fact, not that long ago it was recognized as a self-evident truth. It goes something like this: Far from being a defect, sex-specific parenting is a must. In just the same way we help a child with a proclivity for music fully exploit his potential by encouraging musical endeavors, it serves to cultivate and augment the characteristic qualities of each sex. This helps individuals to fulfill their potential, and prepares them for their unique role, as members of their sex. This is, mind you, how man has always created sound husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, those central building blocks of what is the central building block of civilization: the family.Tragically, many today are making parenting decisions that can have far-reaching consequences based on “transgenderism”-enabling pseudo-science. Good science, as related in the fine Norwegian documentary The Gender Equality Paradox (shown below), informs that the sexes are inherently different womb to tomb.Getting back to name shame, it may surprise you to learn that aside from “Lord” and “Savior,” some parents today are actually naming their children “God.” It’s perhaps fitting, however, in a time where people essentially think they can change their sex and that reality is whatever they will it to be.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research
purposes:
BREMERTON, Wash. – On her previous trip to the Seattle area, Heidi Mund was greeted by more than 120 protesters carrying signs bearing messages such as “Love thy Neighbor” and “Choose Understanding Not Fear.”When she came last week to the Navy town of Bremerton, Washington – a ferry-ride across the Puget Sound from Seattle – a smaller contingent of protesters turned out expressing the same concerns, viewing her as an enemy of tolerance who bears animosity and hatred toward Muslims.What is it that provokes such a reaction to a German schoolteacher who grew up in communist East Germany as an atheist and a “sold-out socialist” before becoming a Christian?In November 2013, Mund drove five hours to the historic Memorial Church of the Reformation in Speyer, Germany, when she heard the church – built to honor Martin Luther – had invited a Muslim imam to give the Islamic call to prayer.Later, explaining the “curse,” she pointed out that the imam was declaring in his call to prayer that only Allah, revealed through the prophet Muhammad, is god.From the church balcony on that November evening, she repeated the words Luther famously declared in 1521, “Here I stand, I can do no other.”“Save the church of Martin Luther,” she shouted.Mund, who was expelled from the church, later said in an interview with CBN, “They should have thrown the imam out of the church, because I am a believer in Jesus Christ, and he serves another god.”She said that when a Muslim declares in a church “Allahu akbar,” or “Allah is supreme over all other gods,” as did the imam, “it is no longer a church; it’s a mosque.”After declaring Allah is supreme, the Islamic muezzin then declares:I bear witness that there is no god except Allah.I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.Death threatsAfter speaking to the Kitsap Patriots Tea Party gathering March 19 in Bremerton, Mund told WND in an interview that her dramatic public stand – which has developed into a ministry called Wake Up, focused on warning Germany of the civilizational encroachment of Islam in Europe – has had consequences.Her husband lost his job, and they both have been the targets of death threats.“Several Muslims have written me, they wanted to slaughter me. Others wanted to rape me,” she told WND.One day after she organized a rally subsequent to her protest at the church, her husband was fired, she said.She noted that the German media has cast her as a racist and a “Nazi.”“They made out of a faithful believer a Nazi,” she said. “Even my students and my colleagues at school, they believed the news more than what they have seen over years.’Over those years, she said, fellow teachers had “honored me; my students they loved me.”“But then, because of this fake news, they changed their minds.”She said new laws in her country have curbed freedom of speech in the name of combatting “hate speech.”“We really need to check what we speak or what we write in public, or even on our mobile phones,” she said. “They check What’s App by law and also our computers by law.”A hate-speech charge was brought against her in Germany that later was dropped.Before her appearance in Bremerton, protesters said they weren’t familiar with anything she specifically had said that was offensive, but they believed that she “degrades” Muslims, expresses hatred toward them because of their religious beliefs and is not welcoming to Muslim immigrants.