Category Archives: Arms

Calculated Cluelessness

What was once top secret is no more.

Trouble is, as I see it, the POTUS just gave information to both our enemies without and within.

Your Rights Are Now Suspended

[Ed: This is a recently received email. I thought it necessary to share with you. The advice given within the email does not necessarily agree with my own.]
…………………
A few months ago, the National Association for Gun Rights first broke this incredible tale out of Shreveport, Louisiana.

At the time, no other gun rights organization had touched the story. But when we tracked down the victim for an interview, we couldn’t believe what we heard, and we immediately sent out a nationwide alert.

The story went viral overnight.

If this tale of government abuse moves you, send it to a friend or family member to get the word out.


Welcome to Shreveport: Your rights are now suspended.
According to Cedric Glover, mayor of Shreveport, Louisiana, his cops “have a power that [. . .] the President of these Unites States does not have”: His cops can take away your rights.

And would you like to guess which rights he has in mind?

Just ask Shreveport resident Robert Baillio, who got pulled over for having two pro-gun bumper stickers on the back of his truck — and had his gun confiscated.

While the officer who pulled him over says Baillio failed to use his turn signal, the only questions he had for Baillio concerned guns: Whether he had a gun, where the gun was, and if he was a member of a pro-gun organization.

No requests for a driver’s licence, proof of insurance, or vehicle registration — and no discussion of a turn signal.

Accordingly, Baillio told the officer the truth, which led the police officer to search his car without permission and confiscate his gun.

However, not only does Louisiana law allow residents to drive with loaded weapons in their vehicles, but Mr. Baillio possessed a concealed carry license!

What does such behavior demonstrate, other than transparent political profiling — going so far as to use the infamous Department of Homeland Security report on “Americans of a rightwing persuasion” as a how-to guidebook, no less?

Mr. Baillio made no secret of his political affiliations: An American flag centers a wide flourish of pro-freedom stickers and decals on his back windshield.

In fact, when Baillio asked the officer if everyone he pulls over gets the same treatment, the officer said no and pointed to the back of his truck.

Baillio phoned Mayor Glover to complain about this “suspension of rights” only to find that his city’s morbidly obese “commander in chief” was elated at the story: According to Glover, Baillio got “served well, protected well, and even got a consideration that maybe [he] should not have gotten.”

Thankfully, Mr. Baillio recorded a good bit of that phone call. You can watch a video with the transcriptions here. I’ve reproduced a chunk of the call below:

Baillio: (in the context of being asked about the presence of a gun) Well, I answered that question honestly, and he disarmed me.

Glover: Which would be an appropriate and proper action, sir. The fact that you gave the correct answer — it simply means that you did what it is you were supposed to have done, and that is to give that weapon to the police officer so he could appropriately place it in a place where it would not be a threat to you, to him, or to anyone in the general public.

[. . .]

Glover: My direction to you is that, had you chosen not to properly identify the fact that you had a weapon and directed that officer to where that weapon was located; had you been taken from the vehicle, and the officer, in the interest of his safety, chose to secure you in a safe position, and then looked, found, and determined that you did, in fact, have a weapon…then, sir, you would have faced additional, [inaudible], and more severe criminal sanctions.

Baillio: So what you’re saying is: I give up all my rights to keep and bear arms if I’m stopped by the police: Is that correct?

Glover: Sir, you have no right, when you have been pulled over by a police officer for a potential criminal offense [which would be what?! – DB] to stand there with your weapon at your side in your hand [Baillio’s weapon was nowhere near his side or his hand, and Glover knew that. – DB] because of your second amendment rights, sir. That does not mean at that point your second amendment right has been taken away; it means at that particular point in time, it has been suspended.

Will Grigg from ProLibertate, an excellent freedom blog, has this to say:

According to Glover, a police officer may properly disarm any civilian at any time, and the civilian’s duty is to surrender his gun — willingly, readily, cheerfully, without cavil or question.

From Glover’s perspective, it is only when firearms are in the hands of people other than the state’s uniformed enforcers/oppressors that they constitute a threat, not only to the public and those in charge of exercising official violence but also to the private gun owner himself.

NAGR spoke with Mr. Baillio, and he told us that he’s in the process of securing the official procedures and codes for firearm handling and private property confiscation for the Shreveport police department.

So far, the city has been half-heartedly cooperating with him.

“I felt sick,” Baillio told NAGR. “My uncles didn’t die for this country so I could surrender my rights like a wimp. I felt terrible. I was just thinking of all that my family has done for freedom in this nation — including dying — and here they are disarming me at a traffic stop.”

What to do?

1. Read Luke’s commentary here, and participate in the discussion by leaving a comment.
2. Send this around. This kind of behavior cannot go unchecked.
3. Call Mayor Glover’s office to complain: (318) 673-5050.

I’ll leave you with one last consideration. As a licensed firearms instructor in charge of a hundred different students every month, I’m often asked if citizens should voluntarily inform police officers of the presence of a firearm during a routine traffic stop.

While different states have different laws, my answer for Colorado citizens is an emphatic “No”: Colorado law doesn’t require you to volunteer that kind of information, and this case in Louisiana proves why, if at all possible, you should never invite trouble by doing so.

For Liberty,
Dudley Brown
Executive Director
National Association for Gun Rights

SCOTUS Chicago And The 2nd Amendment

Without my interjecting (yet), the best read I have seen so far concerning the case is put forth by The Volokh Conspiracy.

There are three posts there. See what you think at one, two and three.

Apparently, we will be waiting until around the June timeframe before we get to find out SCOTUS’ ruling on this.

I hope this works out for all of us in favor of cities and states following the Constitution and not their own poor judgments.


Oh, and Doctor Zero has a nice, appropriate, well written article on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. I like his style and I certainly agree with him.

UPDATE: Let There Be Light

Powerful and Coherent – Light. History in the making.

Could mean more jobs in development and manufacture.

UPDATE: Unfortunately, no. Not anymore.

UPDATEx2: Gun Rights Attacked? Likely

FBI targets gun business in giant FCPA sting

Wounding the firearms industry? This was tried before, but what is going on now?

UPDATEx1:
In the February 2010 edition of the American Rifleman magazine, there is an important article by Wayne Lapierre titled “The First Step In Trampling Our Rights.”

If you can get the magazine, or haven’t read it yet, I suggest this can be important to you should you believe in the 2nd Amendment as I do – it is an individual Right to Bear Arms. To protect and defend your rights, yours and your family’s lives, your home.

In a nutshell, the leading paragraph tells you everything you need to know. There is more detail, and a worthy read.

SoS Hillary Clinton agrees with a “binding” UN treaty on global control of international trade in firearms and ammunition. The Obama administration is thus participating in the march forward to effectively alter our own sovereignty and eliminating our private ownership of firearms along with the rest of the world.

They don’t mention our 2nd Amendment. At all.

Sure, this first step only speaks to “international trade”. For now. But remember, this world gun-ban effort was created and funded by George Soros. Before and during the Bush administration. Until now, John Bolton protected us from the global gun banners.

Where is our protection now?

UPDATEx2: An important letter to our Leaders.

UPDATEx5: Executive Order 12425 Amended

What the heck is this?

Interpol granted full immunity to operate in the U.S. of A.??????

Anyone else see this? It had damn well better be a mistake.

UPDATEx1: And to think I am paranoid. I am not alone. All my thoughts are duplicated by The Anchoress.

UPDATEx2: Jake Tapper (ABC) appears to have a better assessment of this Amendment to this Executive Order. See if you agree. I think he is probably correct.

UPDATEx3: Let’s get back to the issue of full immunity. There is still some worthy concern there as I feel the same about that. Especially from Andy McCarthy. Yes, why should there be immunity for Interpol – please answer that, White House.

UPDATEx4: Apparently, this is part of a plan. (?) Remember past history. This could be a warning.

UPDATEx5: How about that. Someone in Congress agrees this Executive Order should be undone. About time.

Another Executive Order

Some have asked me about this one. This very recent one.

I have to admit, I have more than one concern about it. Namely, how and why a Council of 10 Governors is needed at all. Considering that our union is 50 states strong, just how unbiased are these 10 going to be? And bipartisan? 5 of one party, 5 of another? Does anyone buy this in view of the current political climate? I most certainly do not.

Besides, the Posse Comitatus Act clearly points out the roles of the National Guard and how they are to be focused. The NG is deployed and under the supervision of States Governors at times of crisis. Not under federal supervision/jurisdiction. (And notice that legislation passed during the Bush administration was repealed, reverting wording back to that of the Insurrection Act.) This Executive Order clearly bypasses Congress to employ something new.

My question: How dangerous is this down the road? And before anyone tries to label me a far-right winger, I caution anyone who thinks a soft stick at this point – about this particular issue – has our best interests at heart. History shows otherwise.

This Executive Order is only two days old, it appears, and what else I want to know is – what does your (and my own) representatives know about this one? And what do they intend to do about it?


Attribution to Christopher Suleske, through a mutual friend.

UPDATEx1: Individual Gun Ownership At Risk

Yup, Mayor “I Bought My 3rd Term” Bloomberg wants them all gone.

Better read this article, and follow the links within it. This appears to be a blueprint to skirt the 2nd Amendment AND Congress.

Pay attention, folks. Oh, and don’t forget about Interpol.

UPDATEx1: Let’s not forget about an upcoming SCOTUS hearing in March, McDonald vs. Chicago. As Damon Root tells it, the First Amendment isn’t allowed to be experimented on by states – so why should the Second Amendment be any different?

Healthcare = Backdoor Gun Registration?

Maybe, according to the JPFO.

See what they have to say about it. If I were paranoid about my rights, and I am, this would be a repeat of history.

And it is.