Liberals naively believe that getting a gun is as easy as ordering a happy meal. Wrong.
In a pathetic attempt to video tape the purchase of a gun in order to show the American public just how easy it is, one liberal gets an embarrassing awakening when realizing it is NOT like taking candy from a baby. There are many legal documents and steps required in order to purchase a gun including a three day wait while background checks go through.
Maggie Palmer, an Australian reporter, set out on a mission to by a gun in Las Vegas, a town she described as having relaxed gun laws.
“Literally all you need to buy a new gun is a local ID card,” Palmer wrote in a piece for Australian news outlet SBS.
“The seller conducts a background check which takes less than an hour in some cases. Get the all clear and voila — you’re a gun holder! No license or registration required,” she wrote.
Eager to prove her point, Palmer waltzed into a Walmart with a camera crew, fully expecting walk out of the store with a gun.
Palmer sarcastically called attention to how the rifle display was located next to the toy section. She also pointed out how the Walmart assistant behind the counter claimed she was not particularly educated about guns (and that their regular gun expert was off that day), but yet was still able to sell them.
Next time you assume to know anything about the law or constitution and you also happen to be a liberal maybe actually do some research first.
You Might also like
By Chelsea Betonie — 7 months ago
ROTHSCHILD PUBLICATION PREDICTS SINGLE WORLD CURRENCY WILL BE PUT IN PLACE AS EARLY AS 2018; HELLO NEW WORLD ORDER
The Rothschild-controlled Economist magazine published an article 30 years ago that highlighted the proabability of a world currency by the year 2018.
Thefreethoughtproject.com reports: One must also keep in mind that the controlling interest of The Economist is held by the powerful Rothschild family, who regard themselves as the “custodians of The Economist magazine’s legacy.” In essence, the magazine operates as a quasi-propaganda arm for the Rothschild banking empire and related businesses and, is in many ways, meant to prime the pump of public opinion for the globalist agenda to be implemented.
The excerpt below appeared in the print magazine on January 9, 1988, in Vol. 306, pp 9-10.
Ready for the Phoenix
THIRTY years from now, Americans, Japanese, Europeans, and people in many other rich countries, and some relatively poor ones will probably be paying for their shopping with the same currency. Prices will be quoted not in dollars, yen or D-marks but in, let’s say, the phoenix. The phoenix will be favoured by companies and shoppers because it will be more convenient than today’s national currencies, which by then will seem a quaint cause of much disruption to economic life in the last twentieth century.
At the beginning of 1988 this appears an outlandish prediction. Proposals for eventual monetary union proliferated five and ten years ago, but they hardly envisaged the setbacks of 1987. The governments of the big economies tried to move an inch or two towards a more managed system of exchange rates – a logical preliminary, it might seem, to radical monetary reform. For lack of co-operation in their underlying economic policies they bungled it horribly, and provoked the rise in interest rates that brought on the stock market crash of October. These events have chastened exchange-rate reformers. The market crash taught them that the pretence of policy co-operation can be worse than nothing, and that until real co-operation is feasible (i.e., until governments surrender some economic sovereignty) further attempts to peg currencies will flounder.The New World Economy
The biggest change in the world economy since the early 1970’s is that flows of money have replaced trade in goods as the force that drives exchange rates. as a result of the relentless integration of the world’s financial markets, differences in national economic policies can disturb interest rates (or expectations of future interest rates) only slightly, yet still call forth huge transfers of financial assets from one country to another. These transfers swamp the flow of trade revenues in their effect on the demand and supply for different currencies, and hence in their effect on exchange rates. As telecommunications technology continues to advance, these transactions will be cheaper and faster still. With unco-ordinated economic policies, currencies can get only more volatile.
In all these ways national economic boundaries are slowly dissolving. As the trend continues, the appeal of a currency union across at least the main industrial countries will seem irresistible to everybody except foreign-exchange traders and governments. In the phoenix zone, economic adjustment to shifts in relative prices would happen smoothly and automatically, rather as it does today between different regions within large economies (a brief on pages 74-75 explains how.) The absence of all currency risk would spur trade, investment and employment.
The phoenix zone would impose tight constraints on national governments. There would be no such thing, for instance, as a national monetary policy. The world phoenix supply would be fixed by a new central bank, descended perhaps from the IMF. The world inflation rate – and hence, within narrow margins, each national inflation rate- would be in its charge. Each country could use taxes and public spending to offset temporary falls in demand, but it would have to borrow rather than print money to finance its budget deficit. With no recourse to the inflation tax, governments and their creditors would be forced to judge their borrowing and lending plans more carefully than they do today. This means a big loss of economic sovereignty, but the trends that make the phoenix so appealing are taking that sovereignty away in any case. Even in a world of more-or-less floating exchange rates, individual governments have seen their policy independence checked by an unfriendly outside world.
As the next century approaches, the natural forces that are pushing the world towards economic integration will offer governments a broad choice. They can go with the flow, or they can build barricades. Preparing the way for the phoenix will mean fewer pretended agreements on policy and more real ones. It will mean allowing and then actively promoting the private-sector use of an international money alongside existing national monies. That would let people vote with their wallets for the eventual move to full currency union. The phoenix would probably start as a cocktail of national currencies, just as the Special Drawing Right is today. In time, though, its value against national currencies would cease to matter, because people would choose it for its convenience and the stability of its purchasing power.
The alternative – to preserve policymaking autonomy- would involve a new proliferation of truly draconian controls on trade and capital flows. This course offers governments a splendid time. They could manage exchange-rate movements, deploy monetary and fiscal policy without inhibition, and tackle the resulting bursts of inflation with prices and incomes polices. It is a growth-crippling prospect. Pencil in the phoenix for around 2018, and welcome it when it comes.
Only ten years later, in 1998, The Economist was once again engaging the public in an effort to forward the globalist agenda, with an article entitled “One world, one money.”
Very much in line with the 1988 piece, the publication attempts to explain why a much more centralized and controlled system would be beneficial to the global economy, while wholly ignoring the fact that such a centralized global currency would be a massive coup for the international banking cartel, and the Rothschild banking empire’s financial bottom line.
Additionally, it must be noted that the creation of a global currency would give an inordinate amount of geopolitical capital to unelected international bankers, and subsequently take power away from the citizens of each nation and their respective governmental representatives.
Does anyone really want international bankers to have such a vast amount of political power on top of the massive financial influence and sway they already hold in the halls of power?People want more say in their own lives, not having policy dictated to them by international banksters and bureaucrats.
Control over a nation’s money supply is, for all intents and purposes, the lifeblood of a state’s sovereignty – without this independence, the state only exists in name but is subservient to supranational powers whose interests lie outside of domestic and national political/economic concerns.
“GIVE ME CONTROL OF A NATION’S MONEY SUPPLY, AND I CARE NOT WHO MAKES ITS LAWS,” said Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
Although the Rothschild family now generally keep a very low public profile, they still have significant business operations across a wide spectrum of sectors. While you may not find any one particular Rothschild on the Forbes’ most rich list, the family is estimated to control $1 trillion dollars in assets across the globe, thus having a strong voice across the geopolitical spectrum that many perceive as a hidden hand manipulating events silently from behind a veil of secrecy and silence.
Are you starting to get the picture?
By Craig Bushon — 2 months ago
Within the last several days we’ve witnessed a more aggressive Republican Party coalescing around the White House, as one revelation after another regarding the unprecedented collusion of rogue FBI agents along with former heads of both the Justice Department and the FBI integrating their efforts and attempting to bring down a duly elected president.
One of those Republicans leading the charge is 53-year old Trey Gowdy, the congressmen from South Carolina’s 4th congressional district.
However Gowdy isn’t simply another politician, more importantly, he’s a constitutional scholar, an attorney and a former prosecutor and a former assistant United States Attorney moreover chaired the United States House Select Committee on events surrounding the terrorist attack in Benghazi.
Now the congressman from the 4th congressional district in South Carolina has just released his concerns regarding the bombshell information from the FISA secret memo and the people’s right to know, and it’s explosive!
“We need to know a couple of things. Number one we need to know how the world’s premier law enforcement agency managed to lose five months worth of texts. And what is also troubling in the text we do have they’re discussing how to avoid texts being captured and secured. So what is missing is important but also what is there is important,”
“It is manifest bias not just against Trump, but against his kids, against his business interests. There is a text where they hope the Trump Hotel fails. That is a level of bias that you rarely see and you never see from law enforcement officers,”
“What is also troubling to me is this text that Johnny Ratcliffe found last night about this secret society. Now, I have no clue what that means because it was not the phraseology I used. But it’s the day after the election and it’s the same two people that were discussing a little bit later in the text the damage they had done with the Clinton investigation and how they could, quote, fix it and make it right. That is a level of bias that is stunning among law enforcement officers.
Bolton Cleaning House At National Security Counsel … Obama’s Minions Should “Start Packing Their Sh**”By Manly Man — 4 weeks ago
Kirsters Baish| It was reported that President Trump announced that he had picked former United States Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton to take over for United States Army Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster in his role as head of the National Security Council and chief foreign policy adviser.
The left was obviously extremely unhappy about the decision as Bolton is a Conservative who plays some serious hardball. Rumors almost immediately began going around that Bolton is planning to “purge” the NSC as soon as he takes charge in April.
The rumors mostly came after an article was published in Foreign Policy. The article claimed that Bolton is planning on “cleaning house.” Staffers who are left from the Obama administration are most likely going to be fired.
Some believe that Bolton will be “targeting” anyone who had been “disloyal” to President Trump. He is also expected to get rid of anyone who is suspected to have or known to have made unauthorized leaks to the media. Some of these people were actually brought in during McMaster’s time, but are not considered part of Trump’s agenda.
Bolton will likely be bringing his own team in fairly quickly, but it may take some time due the the rate at which security clearances are being processed for all Trump administration staffers. This means that it might take some time to actually “purge” the NSC.
Foreign Policy explained that it really isn’t out of the normal if Bolton does decide to “clean house.” McMaster basically did just that when he took over for National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
Conservative Tribune reported:
The outlet reported that Bolton — perhaps due to his recent years as a policy analyst on Fox News — was a “known quantity” by Trump, and pointed out that Bolton’s tough stance toward rivals like North Korea and Iran, as well as his dim view of multilateral diplomatic efforts by the United Nations and European Union, would seemingly place him in line with Trump’s “peace through strength” and “America First” doctrines.
But Bolton also holds a hard view towards Russia, and the Foreign Policy writers — perhaps still beholden to the liberal media-perpetuated view that Trump is soft on Russia — wondered if that supposed difference could create a conflict between the two men in the future.
You might remember that Bolton had met with Donald Trump during the end of 2016 when the White House was transitioning from former President Barack Obama to President Trump. He was not appointed to a position at the time. It was reported that Bolton met with Trump again during July of 2017. He was then offered the deputy NSA position. He was promised that one day he would have the head spot, but he decided to turn it down and wait until the top spot was cleared and he could take it.
Some people believe that new information was leaked from McMaster’s NSC staff, more specifically related to President Trump’s congratulatory call to Vladimir Putin after he was re-elected.
Let’s hope Bolton really does “clean house” when he gets there.