Clarence Thomas Brings the Fire, Illinois "Safe Storage" Law

First, a follow-up from episode 696 about the SCOTUS rejecting a challenge to Maryland's "Assault Weapons" ban, in which Clarence Thomas openly rebukes his fellow justices (Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett, etc.) that voted against granting cert thereto.

Then, on to Illinois, where Gov. Prickster is about to sign their latest monstrosity of infringement, a "safe storage" law, that Royce explains is a back door to warrantless 4th Amendment violations.

Transcript

Freedom Guns is your local gun store for the Rockledge Cocoa Area in Brevard County,
Florida. Stop in and meet Mike and the gang and see the great deals they have on
long guns, handguns, accessories, ammunition, AR build kits and Liberty safes that
come with free delivery and installation. They're located at 1255 Florida Avenue just
north of Rockledge High School. For more information, check them out at freedom -guns.com. 

Tell them you heard about them on the Shooting Straight Radio podcast.

The gun site in Merritt Island is your one -stop shop for all of your second
amendment needs. Stop out there and see my friend Steve Kennedy and check out his
nine -lane 25 -yard indoor shooting range. He's got handgun Reynolds galore out there.
If you want to try it before you buy it, the Gunsight and Merritt Island is where
you need to go. Also, we've got a great selection of ammunition, accessories, range
bags. You name it, you'll find it out there at 125 South Banana River Drive in
Merritt Island. Check him out at gunsightrange .com. Make sure you tell Steve Kennedy
that Royce Bartlet sent you.

OPENING THEME MUSIC: 

Turn it on, tune in, crank it up!! Locked and loaded on the Shooting Straight Show!

Turn it on! Tune in! Let's go! Royce Bartlett is the keeper and bearer of truth, we know!

Only the facts about the second amendment (Royceover) And never ever forget that all gun control
laws are nothing less than overt acts of aggression against the American people and their rights"

Exercise your rights in a safe way (Royceover) It's stupidity to think that someone hell-bent on violating the law against murder will magically be stopped by a gun control law

"Politicians that infringe on our God -given rights He calls them out,
he's not here to play So turn it on tune in, crank it up
♪ Royce Bartlett and the shooting straight show ♪ ♪ Let's go,
let's go ♪ - 

We are locked and loaded on the Shooting Straight Radio podcast. This is the program
all about firearms with a heavy emphasis on the Second Amendment and all things
pertaining thereto. I am you're oh-so gracious, magnanimous,
huggable, lovable, squeezable, host, still saturated with gunshot residue,
toxic masculinity, and a faint yet old so wildly tantalizing whiff of the cologne of
my people. Hoppes #9. Got a lot to talk about today.
First, we're gonna remind you that you can check out the new Shooting Straight Radio Podcast logo on the Shooting Straight Radio Podcast first book page and you can
contact me there. Super thanks to Tim Spaulding, who is the captain of the Listener
Retention Squad up in Indiana. Sergeant, appreciate you. And he's been contacting me
there and we've Talking back and forth. You could do the same if you want to reach
out to me there It may take an hour or two for me to get back to you But I
will see that you contacted me and I will respond so you go you can contact me
there or hit me up at shooting straight Radio show at gmail .com or shooting
straight radio podcast at gmail .com I also post a various second amendment articles
on the Facebook page there, so check it out. Don't forget to also check out the
links to all my sponsors on each episode page and make sure that when you do
frequent them that you tell them you heard about them on the Shooting Straight Radio
podcast. Let's dive right on in. This update from episode 696 where I talked about
the dereliction of duty of the Supreme Court. And I must say, I am certainly not
referring to each and every justice on the Supreme Court, certainly not Justice Alito
or Justice Clarence Thomas, but certainly Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and John
Roberts are massive disappointments. And you know,
it's when they pull stuff like this, it's hard not to go, "All right, who got to
you? Who compromised you. Who paid you whatever amount of money to bring you to
where you sided with the anti -American opposition?" I mean,
Roberts showed his colors back when he did what he did with Obamacare and literally rewrote the thing to say, "Oh, it's a tax," so that he could say it's okay because
Congress has the authority to tax. Uh -huh. Well, that was a sign of things to
come, obviously. And he has certainly shown more and more of his true colors ever
since. Now, after the dereliction of duty where the Supreme court denied certiori,
however he pronounced that, he denied cert to a case out of Maryland involving their
assault weapon ban. And He took after, he went after his own fellow justices in the
wake of this and he had a few things to say that I think all of us will
certainly appreciate. He did say that this was the most common popular civilian rifle
in America today. Literally it is too, it's the most common. I mean, if you have
to use the in common use fallacious standard. Well, we've got that covered too.
And he essentially said that Supreme Court is literally depriving Americans in
Maryland of AR -15s and that it is destroying historical tradition of gun ownership.
That's some pretty harsh language for his fellow justices, but you know what? It's
100 % freaking true. And I hope his justices felt the sting of that when he said
it and when they read it or he said it to them, whatever the case may, however
they found out about it. He dissented from their denial of cert.
He called the Fourth Circuit's underlying decision very surprising given that the AR
-15 is literally the most popular and rival in America. And I say it really wouldn't
matter even if it wasn't. The people get to choose what's best for their defense
against all threats, including the government. And the government doesn't have any
choice in that matter as far as I'm concerned, as far as the founders are
concerned, and certainly as far as Justice Thomas is concerned. And according to him,
and not just according to Yeah, but me too. He said AR -15s are clearly arms under
the Second Amendment. Now, again, I'm gonna remind everybody, the word arms means
arms for war. Look it up in any collegiate dictionary. Look it up in the 1828
online Webster's dictionary. You can see it there. He said that they're clearly arms.
They're protected by the Second Amendment, which He said then shifts the burden to
Maryland to show that banning them is consistent with this nation's historical
tradition of firearm regulation, you know, the text and history standard. And so they
didn't do that. They basically made the defense,
The defendants in this case are actually the people bringing the suit, not the
defendants, but the people that were suing Maryland. He, the Fourth Circuit,
caused them and forced them to approve the constitutionality of owning AR -15s.
That's essentially what happened. Mr. Thomas said, he says, "I'm not aware of any
historical regulation that could serve as a proper analog to Maryland's band and amen
you can. Thomas pointed out that the fourth circuit that Maryland relied on the
historical tradition of prohibiting quote -unquote dangerous and unusual weapons but he
argued that that kind of logic would only require that the weapon in question being
the AR -15 to be both dangerous and unusual. And again,
I'm gonna remind everybody that dangerous and unusual is also a fallacious standard.
If a weapon is not dangerous, it could hardly be called a weapon in the first
bloody place. So it has to be dangerous in order to be called an arm. All right?
If it's something that you can deploy a deadly force from then it's dangerous and
it's supposed to be. Guns are supposed to be dangerous when they're used defensively.
That's the only proper way to use them by the way. Anything else is a felony. So
he said that that kind of logic would essentially require the weapon in question to
be both dangerous and unusual at the same time and that AR -15s could not be
considered unusual given that tens of thousands of Americans own them,
so he's literally playing their standard back to them. You want to go by the
dangerous and unusual? That fails in the face of historical text and tradition.
You want to go for common, uncommon use alleged standard? That fails in the face of
Bruin also, and he noted very definitively and he even stated that the urgency of
this case that a lot of Americans rights depended on this case being heard and he
took his fellow justices to task over this and he said he said that question in
other words a question of the constitutionality of the AR -15 is of critical
importance to tens of millions of law -abiding AR -15 owners throughout the country.
And he said that the justices have already, listen to this, avoided that question
for well over a decade, a freaking decade. And what did we hear in episode '96
when we were talking about this originally, Mr. Cavanaugh going, well, maybe in the
next term or two. We'll take this in hand.
You sissy, you gutless little twerp. I've lost all respect for you.
I've lost all respect for John Roberts. And you can gain it back by getting
yourself back in line with the Constitution. Even if such guns were not in common
use.
Again I say that's a fallacious standard due to the fact that the Founders never
referred to any such standard. A lot of the weapons that were coming into their
time were brand new and were not in common use much like the Jurandani air rifle
carried by none other than Lewis and Clark and their journey to the west passage
there, or the Kaltoff repeating rifle. There were many guns that were very unusual
and were not in common use, but that didn't, the founders never said,
"No, we reject that because a lot of people don't have it already." That's a big
bunch of fertilizer, if you ask me. And of course, not to mention the fact that
everything, anything, whether it's a gun or what, Anything that's currently in common
use, you know, like the light bulb, was originally not in common use when it was
first invented and introduced to the market, which, if you think about it,
would automatically disqualify anybody and everybody from owning it because it's not
in common use. Sorry, Mr. Edison. No one uses light bulbs. We're still using scene
lamps, sir. Those light bulbs are not in common use. You see the fallacy of that.
Now, Mr. Thomas makes a very, hmm, what should I say, some very hard,
took some hard shots at his compatriots. He said, "The Fourth Circuit deliberately
avoided any inquiry into the commonality of AR -15s and the purposes for which they
are used, which it dismissed as an ill -conceived popularity test. Well,
of course they did. That you see, the Fourth Circuit had this case decided long
before it hit their desk. I absolutely assure you of that. Mr.
Thomas continued, he said instead, the court performed its own independent
investigation of AR -15s and their utility for self -defense examined their military
origin in their firepower and muzzle velocity among other features.
Why? You know, you understand there's plenty of rifles already on the civilian market
today that have a muzzle velocity much greater than a 556 millimeter or 223
Remington. Yeah, you know that, right? Yeah, I know my listeners do. I'm speaking
out into the hypothetical void to everybody out there that needs to listen. I mean,
you understand that my two, I have a 270 caliber that I hunt with Remington,
Remington 700 270. And that thing rips out of the end of the muzzle,
probably about 3 ,400, sometimes 3 600 feet per second depending on the weight of
the bullet. The 30 -odd -6 also puts out rounds.
As a matter of fact, there's an accelerator round made for the 30 -odd -6 that once
it leaves the muzzle, it actually accelerates to over 4 ,000 feet per second.
The bullet is heavier than the 55 -grain 556 round, which gives it much greater
distance, much more energy and impact when it hits. And so, what about that?
Matter of fact, the M1 Grand fired that round and a lot of the later ones fired
the 308. The Infields fired the 3006,
some of the original ones. A lot of them fired the British 303. I hope I'm doing
all that from memory, so I hope I got those numbers right. But the point is, who
is the court to say, well, wait a minute, the muzzle velocity on this is super
fast. Yeah, it's really, really super fast. And therefore, it's dangerous and unusual.
Well, it is a fast round. It does have a lot of energy when it hits. And it's
supposed to, because it is a weapon that can be used for warfare and that's what
makes it covered by the bloody Second Amendment in the first place. Oh, firepower.
Oh my goodness, you can put up to 30 rounds out of one of these things out of a
single magazine. So what? So bloody what?
Every cop in America, every federal officer in America has an AR -15,
most of theirs are M4s with select fire switches.
What's that means? We can have them too. You understand that, right? I know my
listeners, I'm not talking to my listeners. My listeners are pretty smart. Most of
them, the ATF agents and the FBI agents that were monitoring the program,
I haven't seen the hide and or hair of y 'all in a while for some reason.
Yeah, I know y 'all don't know these things, that's why you work for the agencies
that you do. But, you got a muzzle velocity, firepower,
military origin? Well, military origin is what definitely qualifies it for Second
Amendment protection, according to the founders.
Mr. Thomas said our Constitution allows the American people, not the government,
To decide which weapons are useful for self -defense, amen, Mr. Thomas. He said,
"A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges' assessments of its usefulness is
no constitutional guarantee at all," and that's a quote from Heller he's bringing out
there. He said, "In line with that principle and with the tradition of prohibiting
only dangerous and unusual weapons, we have never relied on our own assessment of
how useful an arm is for self -defense before deeming it protected. And I want to
ask the Fourth Circuit something. How many of you, and I already know the answer,
this is a totally rhetorical question, how many of you sitting there in your black
robes and slamming your gavels on your benches, how many of you all know the first
damn thing about an AR 15 in the first place. Oh, besides the muzzle velocity and
the magazine capacity and all that crap. What do y 'all know about them? What do y
'all know about any guns for that matter? I got a feeling most of y 'all don't even
own one. If you do, you're keeping it pretty quiet. But who are y 'all? Who are
any of you out there that are ignorant of firearms, ignorant of the Constitution,
ignorant of the Second Amendment, ignorant of the depths of the Second Amendment,
and the necessity of it, and the purpose of it, who in the Blippity Blank are any
of you to tell us what it says and which guns are useful for our personal defense.
Yeah, you're bloody welcome. Mr. Thomas said, "In Heller, we found handguns were
protected because that class of arms, that is, handguns, is overwhelmingly chosen by
American society for the lawful purpose of self -defense. He said in Satano,
which is another famous case, he said, "We recognized that stun guns were protected
arms solely because they were not unusual without addressing the state courts holding
the stun guns were dangerous per se at common law." He said, "And in Bruin we
again found handguns protected solely because they are 'in common use today' for self
-defense without inquiring whether they are in fact useful for that purpose." So he's
excoriating the Fourth Circuit and using their own standards, throwing them right back
at them. So, Mr. Thomas, like your host, has quite often lamented the marginalized
treatment that too many courts seem to show towards the Second Amendment. Now,
I tell you what, that is absolutely true. The Second Amendment is a second -class
right, and that's a comment that Mr. Thomas made himself. It is a second -class
right. You're treated these days that if you exercise that right, you're some sort
of a criminal and a murderer and an enabler of violent crime. That's how we're
treated. Mr. Thomas said, "I doubt we would sit idly by if lower courts were to so
subvert other precedents involving any other constitutional right." And he's referring
to the Bruin precedent. He said, "We wouldn't sit there and allow lower force to do
what they're doing to the Bruin decision, but here we are, we're doing exactly that.
And he said, until we are vigilant in enforcing it, in other words, enforcing the
Bruin standard of text and history, the right to bear arms will remain a second
class right. Very true, Justice Thomas, and I thank God for you,
sir. I really appreciate the fact that you are a institutionally minded man, and I'm
very grateful that you are on this on the Supreme Court I can't say much for
Kavanaugh Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett. I can't so Alito and Gorsuch,
I don't know if you know this they Officially stated flat out that they would
gladly have heard the appeal along with Clarence Thomas So there was three people
all the needed was one more more. And what happened to one more? All the need was
one more person. Only took four people to grant cert to this. Kavanaugh,
his name is now going to become a byword. He actually penned a statement in which
he predicted that quote, "This court should and presumably will address the AR -15
you soon in the next term or two. No,
I don't believe he would do that either. I really don't. You know why? Because he
voted against cert. He voted to deny cert in this case.
It wasn't just him saying, "Well, you know, I'm not gonna participate." No, he voted
to deny it. That's what these other justices did. They took a vote,
Amy Coney Barrett, Thomas Alito, Kavanaugh, all of them.
They took a vote and the only three that seem to be on the constitutional side of
this issue is Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch. Since when was the notion that we the
people can only use and acquire certain guns only if lots of other people are
already using them. Where did that crap come from? If that's the starting point for
ownership then the first civilian to ever purchase an AR -10 or an AR -15 would have
been crap out of luck on that. Oh you can't have that, it's not in common use.
You have to wait until a bunch of other people own them too and then you'll have
the right to carry it. See how idiotic that sounds good because it is.
It's stupid beyond measure. It's excruciatingly stupid and ignorant. We'll take a
brief commercial timeout when we come back. We're gonna talk about safe storage laws
that have been passed in Illinois. Yes the communist occupied territory of Illinois
and we're gonna talk about what that means for the good citizens there So don't go
anywhere. We've got a lot more to talk about here on Shooting Straight.
The
Police Hall of Fame and the United States Law Enforcement Foundation, where bold
vision and hope align to create a better tomorrow for all law enforcement and the
communities they serve by strong advocacy, hard and soft skills training and
education, and their many programs of compassion. To learn more, please go to USLEF
.ORG or APHF .ORG. This is your humble host and I am proud and honored to say that
Sicario's Gun Shop is a sponsor of the Shooting Straight Radio podcast. They're up
on North Wickham Road in Melbourne. They are your full service Gun Store. They offer
a wide range of firearms including class 3 and NFA weapons, ammo and accessories,
gun smithing. If you want to buy or trade head on down to Sicario's Gun Shop. They
also offer transfer service, custom builds. If you need a muzzle device pinned and
welded no problem they can do that too. Coatings, refinishings, cleanings, survival
safety items. Sicario's Gun Shop is your full service Gun or in North Melbourne.
They also have a fine selection of gun safes to choose from. Check them out at
sacariosgunshop .com. Make sure you tell them you heard about them on Shooting
Straight, "Sacarios Gun Shop," where you come first for your second.
Norm's Music Shop. Producer and music creator for Shooting Straight Radio podcast.
I can write and record a personalized music track for your audio or video projects.
Do you want a song for a special occasion? I can do that. For more information
contact Norm's Music Shop at gmail .com
Let's create your musical identity. Thank you. Welcome back to the program in the
first portion we talked about Clarence Thomas's follow -up to the episode 696 where
we talked about the Supreme Court shirking its duty, literally being in dereliction
of duty, refusing to enforce a standard that they created, the standard of text and
history, and they are doing a massive disservice. They are aiding a betting
infringement, not only in Maryland, but every other state of the Union that denies
their people the right to keep and bear AR -15s, Ruger Mini -14s,
other type, excuse me, tactical rifles, AK -47s, whatever. And now we're going to go
to Illinois and we're going to look at what happened there recently, they just
recently passed a safe storage law. Now, be careful with this safe storage law crap,
because it sounds very innocuous. Well, we just want to make sure that guns are put
away and out of reach of kids. Well, most of us already do that already. We don't
need a law telling us to do it. Okay, if this was such a major problem,
You'd know about it. It would be on the same level as, let's say, shootings in
Chicago on a really tough weekend. Hmm, you'd hear about it. You'd know about it.
It's not as prevalent as people make it out to be. This has nothing to do with
keeping kids away from guns. This kind of law, these safe storage laws,
are nothing but a backdoor to 5th Amendment violations, and 5th Amendment too,
if you really think about the depths of it. Yes, remember when Kakling Kamaluk and
the Kami Harris there said, you remember, she said this on video,
and she said, flat out, hell yeah, we're going to come into your house without a
warrant and make sure your guns are put away, or something along those lines. You
remember that? It's out there. go to YouTube you'll find it if you can't let me
know I'm gonna search for it now if I can I'll post the link to the next up on
the on the next episode but they are that these are nothing but backdoors to fourth
amendment violations that is people coming into your home and trust me when I tell
you what's going to happen on the tail end of this law being passed is they're
gonna pass another one that says well you know We have to make sure we can enforce
this. So, you know, if you're a gun owner, you have to register yourself and
register your address and what type of guns you have and you're subject to spot
inspections. Don't you doubt me on this? I guarantee blank and to you that's gonna
happen. I assure you with every fiber of my being that is exactly what's going to
happen. And it's gonna happen very soon on the tail end of this. So this law,
basically gun owners in Illinois are gonna face a $10 ,000 fine if their gun is
stolen and used in a crime. I said if their gun is stolen and used in a crime.
Okay, so what does that do? Well, that puts an onus on the people to lock their
guns up so tight that they can't even get to them either. Well who does that
protect? The criminals in government and the criminals on the street but at Daggum
sure doesn't protect the people. So if you live in Illinois and your gun gets
stolen or if you lose your gun, and maybe you didn't even know that it was stolen
or know it was lost, if a criminal gets their hands on it and uses it in a crime
and harms or kill somebody else, you're going to be liable. How do you like that?
I'll be referencing an article by John Clark and here I'm going to give you a
little smattering of it to get started. It says a bill allegedly designed to keep
firearms from children to mentally ill and potential criminals has passed through the
Illinois General Assembly and heads to Governor Prickster's desk to be signed into
law. And I guarantee you, Prickster is going to make great fanfare of it. He'll
probably surround himself with a bunch of children just to really drive it home.
We're protecting the children.
I could go, I could take a rabbit trail there. Anyway, Senate Bill 8 passed its
final hurdle in the state house on day. Current Illinois law requires gun owners to
keep their weapons secured if a child under the age of 14 is present in the home.
The new legislation expands that requirement if any minor is present regardless of
age. That means 17 on down.
Just think about all the implications of that. The text of the law also applies if
a quote at risk person or prohibited person is present in the home.
A violation of the law would subject the gun owner to a $500 fine and that
increases to a thousand if the gun owner quote reasonably should have known well
anytime you add the word reasonable in a communist occupied uh,
reasonable is what they say it is. Yeah, and it's usually a, it's, it's a sliding
scale. I assure you of that. Uh, reasonably should have known that the person was
likely to gain access to the weapon. However, if an unsecured gun is taken and used
in the commission of a suicide or a crime, the gun owner can face a fine of up
to $10 ,000. Okay, I assure you this also. Mark my words.
I said it today on the 4th of June, 2025. They're going to increase the penalties
for this. They're also going to increase it to jail time. Wait, you think I'm
kidding you. You wait and you watch. It's going to happen. So, Senator Elman,
a Democrat -Communist from Naperville, Illinois, made these comments. He said,
"Unfortunately, children and teens are most at risk of injury or death because of
unsecured guns." That's not true. And Illinois has seen over 1 ,700 gun -related
deaths due to firearms not being locked away over how many years. This measure
addresses these risks and the rising number of gun -related deaths and injuries by
strengthening Illinois storage safety standards. Oh, there you go. If you make the
law stronger, then bad guys will obey it. Yeah, just make it a little bit stronger
next time, then they'll fall in line. Oh, well, wait. There's still bad things
happening? Let's make it a little bit stronger. Let's add six months to a year in
jail. That ought to do it. And by the way, Ms. Elbin is a pathological liar
because of course, if you're a Democrat, you have to be. So this is patently false.
The biggest threats of grave bodily injury or death in this country for children 17
and under comes from the medical profession and the COVID vaccine. You're welcome.
The article continues according to data from the Illinois State Democrats, because
they are after all such a shining example of honesty and truthfulness.
My goodness. Nearly 54 % of gun owners do not securely lock all of their firearms
away and 82 % of teen suicides involve a gun that belonged to a family member.
Show your work. Show me the studies on that because I got studies that say that's
bull fertilizer. Yeah, this data was undoubtedly spawned by one or more of the
civilian disarmament cartels. But Democrats also cite studies
And we know Democrats and Democrat studies are absolute bastions and bulwarks of
propriety and veracity.
Site studies that show lost or stolen guns are major contributors to suicides,
unintentional shootings, mass shootings, and escalating crime. Well, how about we start
arresting all the criminals that are stealing the guns then. Well, how about we give
that a shot? I mean, after you arrest them, why don't you keep them in jail
without bond? If they're so damn dangerous, they can't be out on the street and
they can't own a gun, then they need to be behind bars. I mean, after they're
sentenced to the fullest term allowable under the law, how about you make them serve
every single minute of it and then tell them as they're leaving the prison that
they'll get life without parole if they're arrested again for the slightest reason.
How about we do that? Also, by the way, almost 400 ,000 guns are stolen annually
from private citizens in the US. 400 ,000,
actually 380 ,000 is the number, but I rounded it up. 380 ,000 guns stolen from
private citizens in the U .S., and I will absolutely wager my eye teeth that most
of those thefts take place in heavily gun -controlled areas, or the outlying cities
and states. Even the highly deceitful Giffords Group reported that one gun is stolen
from an individual owner every two minutes, and was stolen guns often diverted to
the illegal, that is criminal, gun market. Really, so these guys steal guns and they
divert them to the underground gun market to sell to other people who are not
legally eligible to own them and somehow that is the fault of every law -abiding gun
owner who ever had a gun stolen from them. How about you Mommies demand that law
enforcement shut down the illegal gun market. How about we put all this effort that
you're gonna put into making sure that we the people tow the line and stay in
within the confines of this law? How about you actually shut down the illegal gun
market? How about you start taking those criminals out of the freaking society that
they're in rather than attack lawful gun owners with legislation that holds them
responsible for the actions of criminals who stole their guns. No victim of gun
theft has any control over their weapon once it has been stolen. Would you charge
somebody who had their car stolen and this car thief drove their car through a
crowd of people? Would you charge the victim of the theft?
That's
We get by the way, we're gonna start holding cops responsible whenever their sidearm
is taken from them during a street scuffle and used against them You're gonna blame
them Well, they should have had it in a level 90 holster instead of just a level
three Well, that would probably be some idiot Democrat who would say something like
that Yeah, well, how many guns are actually lost every year? Well,
That's hard to figure out. No matter how much research I did. There's nothing out
there and no data that says how many guns are actually lost
Okay, and By the way, how many people have ever lost a gun and didn't know you
lost a gun if you lost a gun? Did you report it? Well? I think you should in
that case somebody ends up with it that shouldn't have it Yeah, heck. Yeah, if I
ever lost a gun I would report it hey I lost this gun don't know where it is no
something but yeah I'm responsible at that point but anything that happens with that
gun beyond that is absolutely out of my control and I am not responsible I'm not
being flippant I'm not trying to shirk responsibility I'm simply telling you that's
the case so what Illinois is doing is making the victims of theft responsible for
the criminal's actions who stole their gun, even though it's no longer in their
possession or power. Yeah, the victim's possession or power. These people's studies
show that states that have adopted strong firearm storage laws have seen a 78 %
decrease in unintentional shootings by children and a 46 reduction in illegal gun
trafficking. There's a word for that, and it describes what you will find walking
through a pasture at night. If you rock through there in your bare feet and you
will find it, you'll feel it squish between your toes. And that's the rendering of
one of those four -legged critters walking around out there, dropping those things
behind them as they walk. Yes, bull fertilizer. Name the study so we can all read
it for ourselves. Y 'all are great at naming studies and and all these other things
and never put them out there. We can study the study. We can see if it's full of
crap or not. No, you just say well these studies say this and these other things
said that and and and these experts said this and that. Yeah,
why is that study not linked up, huh? Well, one of the sensible people in Illinois,
Representative John Cabello, out of Machesney Park,
Republican, he said, "Only in Illinois would we hold victims of crime more
accountable than the criminals." Amen, brother. He said, "Now, if someone breaks into
your home and steals your firearm, you could be slapped with a $10 ,000 fine," and
he's made this next statement it just echoes. Let it echo. He said it's ridiculous
and anti -American. Well, heck yeah, it is anti -American.
He said Democrats are so eager to score points with the out -of -state anti -gun
groups that they've abandoned common sense entirely. Well, I kind of disagree with
that, Mr. Cabello, because Democrats don't care about scoring points with the civilian
disarmament cartels because they are all one and the same. What they are doing is
attempting to disarm conservatives by any and all means necessary and that is their
constant drive and motive. Make no mistake about that, sir. Mr. Cabello finished by
saying instead of enforcing the laws we already have or holding repeat offenders
accountable, what a novel idea, they're placing blame on law abiding citizens and
undermining the Second Amendment, undermining the Second Amendment. You mean like
inactive Supreme Court justices who didn't do their duty to uphold and defend the
Constitution and uphold and defend their own standards of text and history?
Again, Mr. Cabello, it's all for the express purpose of disarming all of us who
will still wish to live in a constitutional republic. To them,
the communists, we must all be eliminated in order to for them to seize permanent
power over the U .S. That's their design and that's their goal is to disarm we the
people. That's us conservatives. That's us who uphold and defend the Constitution. Mm
-hmm. That's their purpose and they won't stop until that purpose has been completed
and fulfilled because that's not their end game by the way. Once we're disarmed you
know good and dead going well what's gonna happen just like I do. We'll be in the
camps brothers and sisters. As for me? No. You'll have to bury me before you ever
drag me off to one of those camps and /or my family off to one of those camps you
will have to slip on a pile of empty brass when you come to pry my weapon from
my cold dead hands and you better be careful the barrel is going to be really
really freaking hot. I tell you what this kind of nonsense just fries my backside
like a three foot tall flame. It's bad enough that you got the democrat communist
in Illinois doing crap like this and constantly and steadily eating away and chewing
away at people's rights. But then, as we talked about in the first part of the
program, we got the Supreme Court basically aiding and abetting that very freaking
thing. How about that? How do you feel about it? How do you feel about that
betrayal? Because it is betrayal. And we've been on that subject for multiple
episodes now and I'm finding it hard to get off that subject. It is betrayal. The
Supreme Court betrayed the gun owners in Maryland. The Supreme Court betrayed all of
the gun owners in every state that has an assault weapons ban. The most recent one
being Colorado.
You dropped the ball. You shirked your responsibility. You,
Justices, Cavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Mr. John Roberts, you may as well walk
across the aisle and change sides and join the Anti -Second Amendment people because
that's exactly what you've done. You've empowered them even further with your
inaction. You filthy swine. I've lost respect for you. No, I'm not gonna be nice
about Supreme Court justices who don't do their I'm not going to treat them with
respect when they don't treat the supreme law of the land with respect enough to
actually weigh in on a case that has to do with a
Decision principle that they created a couple of years ago for Pete's sake You're no
better than the Illinois Democrats John Roberts. Mr. Kavanaugh. Miss Barrett.
You're no better than them You're no better than any of the Democrat communists in
any bloody state and the things that they have done you Are assisting them you are
enabling them to continue to go further with it? That's exactly what you're doing.
So my friends We have a fight in front of us This is why I say be as loud and
active as you can until it's time for us to load up and do what we gotta do. And
I hope that day just stays as far away as possible. But if it must come, I hope
it comes in my day, so my boy's no peace. Then again, they're gonna be ready to
fight themselves also. Okay, I don't mean fight themselves, but fight themselves also.
Okay, just make sure I clear that up. So stay in contact with your reps, stay
trained up. By the way, I have a justifiable use of force class coming up on the
22nd of this month, it's going to be down at Control Jiu Jitsu, one of the
sponsors of this program in Melbourne. If you'd like to come down there and take
that class, if you'd like to get a certificate to get your permit in case you want
to bypass the three -day wait for a gun purchase in Florida, or if you want to
have reciprocity with other states, then I'll be handing out certificates and also
you might get a chance to Shoot yours truly with some of my training guns. Yeah,
some of my force on force guns. So it will be less than lethal, I assure you.
I would not let you point a loaded gun at me without me pointing one right back
at you much quicker and fast, you know. Anyway, you know what I mean. So if you
want to take that class, meet me out there and stay trained up, stay armed up and
never forget in coming rounds, always have the right of way. Royce out.