The coming long hot summer

Meanwhile, Democrats continue their assault on the Bill of Rights.

Brady Campaign Boasts: Gun Control a Central Plank of Hillary Clinton’s Campaign

Gross wrote:

Hillary Clinton was with us when the Brady Bill was signed. She was with us at the Million Mom March. She was with us in the Senate to fight the corporate gun lobby. She was with us in Charleston. She wore orange with us on Gun Violence Awareness Day and she’s been with us and our 94 chapters every step of her campaign. And that’s why we’re with her.

On June 5 Clinton told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that government has “a right” to regulate the Second Amendment.

Gun Owners of America (GOA) released a June 7 statement alerting Americans that Obama is trying to take guns from grandparents.

GOA makes this assertion based on Obama’s executive gun controls, which include a gun ban for some Social Security beneficiaries, and the actual federal registry announcement showing that an overview of the Social Security gun ban has been “formally published” by the Social Security Administration (SSA).

Breitbart News previously reported that the SSA’s overview of the ban contains details making it clear that beneficiaries who do not receive benefits themselves, but have them sent to someone who manages finances for them, take the risk of running afoul of the SSA and being prohibited from purchasing guns.

(Snip)

Now GOA is explaining how this Social Security gun ban works itself out in real life–namely, by depriving grandpa of the ability to legally purchase a firearm.

GOA put it this way:

If you are on Social Security disability by reason of a mental health impairment, then your gun rights are gone. Period.

The regulation promises to aggressively search for and take away the gun rights of Social Security Disability recipients with PTSD, ADHD, post partem [sic] depression, Alzheimer’s, etc.

But understand this: Some parts of the regulation, like the definition of “adjudicated as a mental defective” in proposed CFR 421.105, are applicable to all Title II recipients, including old-age programs. Thus, under this language, if you are a senior and can’t “manage [your] own affairs,” you are specifically acknowledged by the Social Security Administration as being a “mental defective” for purposes of making you a prohibited person.

DNC Platform Committee Member: Nobody Should Own a Gun

DNC Platform Committee member Bonnie Schaefer says she does not believe “anyone should have a gun.”

She said this in a video aired by CSPAN and released on June 8.

Schaefer said the focus has to go beyond “keeping the guns out of the hands of mentally ill people and criminals.” She added, “I really don’t personally think anyone should have a gun. That’s just my own philosophy.”

The video of Schaefer decrying private gun ownership comes just three days after presumptive Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton refused to answer George Stephanopoulos’ question as to whether the right to bear arms is constitutional.

Stephanopoulos asked the question twice and both times Clinton avoided answering it. The closest she came to answering it was when she said, “If it is a constitutional right, then it–like every constitutional right–is subject to reasonable regulation.”

Hillary Clinton – Gun Grabber In Chief

According to Mad World News, Stephanopoulis asked Clinton, “Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right — that it’s not linked to service in a militia?”

Here’s how she responded:

“I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia, and there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations. So I believe we can have common sense gun safety measures, consistent with the Second Amendment.

California Introduces Law To Jail Anyone Who Questions Man-Made Climate Change: “First Amendment Now Dead”

The first-of-its-kind legislation — Senate Bill 1161, or the California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016 — is scheduled for floor action Thursday after clearing Senate committees in April and May.

The measure would allow state and local prosecutors to pursue claims against climate-change skepticism as a violation of the state’s Unfair Competition Law [UCL], as well as extend the four-year statute of limitations for such claims retroactively to Jan. 1, 2021.

“This bill explicitly authorizes district attorneys and the Attorney General to pursue UCL claims alleging that a business or organization has directly or indirectly engaged in unfair competition with respect to scientific evidence regarding the existence, extent, or current or future impacts of anthropogenic induced climate change,” says the state Senate Rules Committee’s floor analysis.

While the measure enjoys broad support by a bevy of environmental groups, the bill has also been described as an effort to ban free speech on climate change as well as chill donations to free-market groups.

Stephen Frank, editor of the conservative California Political Review, called the bill a “totalitarian statement by Democrats that the First Amendment is now dead.”

Seriously. No Joke. Speaking of jokes:

Dems on FEC vote to regulate political jokes

Over mocking objections from their own staff, two top Democrats on the politically divided Federal Election Commission voted to investigate one-time Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee for joking that he hoped supporters would shower him with million dollar contributions.

In the latest display of FEC Democratic efforts to regulate speech and target Republicans, Commissioners Ann Ravel and Ellen Weintraub backed a complaint against Huckabee, who made the joke during his May 2015 presidential candidacy announcement.

e later told the FEC it was a joke, and the FEC staff report on the issue noted that Huckabee even changed his demeanor when he said it to reinforce that he wasn’t serious.

“We conclude that an objective listener would not reasonably have understood that Huckabee in fact solicited million-dollar contributions. Rather, he appeared, to be making a humorous aside in the course of his speech,” said the just released staff report that recommended that a complaint against the former Arkansas governor be dismissed.

But when the vote — also just released — was taken, Ravel and Weintraub balked. All three Republicans and the third Democrat on the FEC voted to dismiss the complaint.

The two Democrats backed legal enforcement of the claim that Huckabee was actively urging supporters to contribute more than the legal limits of $2,700. The complaint against Huckabee said that he was actually soliciting big dollar contributions for an affiliated political action committee, but he never mentioned it in his speech.

In mocking language, the FEC staff noted in its report how it was clearly a joke. Said the report: