Falsehoods: The Bane of Liberty

1st Half:  A man was falsely accused and arrested for stealing several firearms, only to discover the missing guns were due to bookkeeping errors by the gun store he worked for. This was after his home was raided by multiple agencies, including the filthy ATF.

A man is jailed for possessing a stolen gun, in spite of him offering exculpatory evidence to prove it was his! The police told him, "We don't wanna hear it!"

2nd Half:  We've all been told that the Firearm Owner's Protection Act/Hughes Amendment banned fully automatic weapons from civilian hands if they were manufactured after 1986. Turns out, that isn't true!!

Freedom Guns
Firearms, Ammunition, Accessories, Training classes

The Gun Site
9-Lane 25 yard indoor Shooting Range, Gun Store, Training classes

WJS Guns
Gun and Outdoor Shop, ammo, accessories, fishing tackle, more

Glover Orndorf and Flanagan Wealth Mgmt.
Wealth management services

SHOOTINGCLASSES.COM
Online business operations platform for firearms instructors, trainees, and Shooting Ranges

Sicarios Gun Shop
Firearms, Accessories, Ammo, Safes, and more!

Counter Strike Tactical
Best Little Gun Store in Melbourne, Florida! Veteran Owned and Operated 321-499-4949

Control Jiu-Jitsu/MMA
Jiu-Jitsu/MMA Training in Melbourne, FL

Ear Care of Melbourne
Need hearing aids? Go to the audiologists that gave Royce his hearing back!

Go2 Weapons
Manufacturers of AR platform rifles for military and civilian. Veteran Owned and Operated

Quantified Performance
Quantified Performance, LLC is focused on building safe, high performing keepers and bearers.

Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.

Transcript

THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS AUTO-GENERATED ELECTRONICALLY AND MAY NOT BE PERFECTLY WORD-FOR-WORD ACCURATE OR GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT. WE APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE FOR ANY IRREGULARITIES AND/OR MISTAKES.

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 Sight 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 rentals galore out there. If you want to try it before you buy it, the Gun Sight in 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 Bartlett sent you. Progression against the American. Size over. And someone held against murder. Gun control law. Said let's go, so let's. We are locked, loaded, and loud on the Shooting Straight Radio podcast. This is all about firearms with a heavy, heavy emphasis on the Second Amendment and all things pertaining thereto.
I am Royce, your also benevolent host, still reeking of gunshot residue, toxic masculinity, and a faint yet oh-so-tantalizing whiff of the cologne of my people, Hops No. 9. Absolutely. I hope you're paying attention to the news. Are you seeing the threats being levied at us by Iranian, I guess, higher-ups or terrorists or whatever?
They are saying now that Americans will not be safe in their own homes. Okay. We'll see how that works out for you. I'm sure you guys are going to be successful in the blue states and blue cities, but I don't think you're going to fare too well in the red cities and the red states. I think you're going to get snuffed out pretty quick, but I don't want to minimize that a lot of these guys...
are trained people. You've heard Sarah Adams. I'm sure if you don't follow her on social media, you should. She talks about the threats that are here, are here now. And she said there are teams of active shooters, not just one, but teams. And I know you've heard me talk about this all before. I'm not going to belabor that anymore. But the point is,
Don't think that they're not going to have wild success and that things will not be disrupted. They are going to do bad things, and we need to be ready for it. So, again, make sure you're armed at all times when you leave your home, especially when you're home. Some of you guys out there that have some good carbines, suppressed carbines, whatever, make sure you've got a battle vest or a battle belt in there with you with a few spare mags.
be able to fight your way back home, hopefully. And we just got to be vigilant, people. There's bad actors in here that were let in by the Democrat Communist Party who are sworn enemies of the Constitution. Yes, if you're a Democrat, you're an enemy of the Constitution. You can sit there and piss and moan about that all you want, but that's the bottom line, and that's just the bold and glaring truth, whether they like it or not, and whether anybody else likes it or not.
So be paying attention. Things are getting lively with what's going on in Iran, and we better be prepared for it. Let's dive in. Let me give you just a brief opener. This hit me close to home because I have very dear friends in Louisville, Kentucky, and you'll notice that I said that right. So that's proof that I do have friends there in Louisville, Kentucky. Anyway, there is a...
a gun store that wants to open up there, and there are some people protesting the location. And the shop is called Madden Firearms, and it's set to open up at the Bardstown Center on Bardstown Road, actually. Some of y'all know where that's at. The neighbors that have banded together to try to keep this gun store from opening, one of them by the name of Tim Darst,
They say that they are hopeful they can change the owner's mind about coming to their area. And Mr. Darst said this. He said, open your heart. How about they just open a gun store instead? Yeah. Anyway, open your heart. Do what is right. Open your gun store somewhere else in town. We don't have any gun stores in the neighborhood. He has the perfect right to do that, open a gun store.
Not to. Okay, why? Well, they explain. We have three synagogues and ten schools within one mile of here. We've had lots of shootings at schools and synagogues. We just don't want to do anything to help encourage that. Now, how many of you feel intellectually diminished having heard that?
Yeah, I mean, I feel dumber just reading it. How will a gun shop encourage shootings in schools and synagogues? How? Is it going to arm some shooter or something? Please study the dynamics of how these people get their guns and where they get their guns and things like that. So how is the location of a gun shop going to encourage shootings at synagogues and schools nearby?
And if gun stores actually do encourage school and synagogue shootings, then why would you want them to move somewhere else? Wouldn't they be an encourager of shootings elsewhere, too? I mean, you want to just push your fictitious problem off on somebody else? If you'll notice, these idiots like to assign guilt for criminal shootings.
against us peaceable American gun owners and gun stores. That's some guilt that I absolutely and categorically reject. And all of you gun control supporting morons can shove it straight up your tailpipe, for lack of a more polite way to put it. You don't get to assign guilt to us that we did not earn. So...
That's what I'm starting to program with. I just had to say something for the benefit of all my friends there in Louisville, Kentucky. And Beth, PJ, you guys have a great one. Hope to talk to you soon. Now, let's move on to, let's see, Tremontan. Where is Tremontan? What state is this? It doesn't say. Anyway, a firearms instructor was...
told he needed to take a plea bargain for allegedly stealing firearms where he worked. And this guy was a USMC veteran. His name was Stephen Cord, Stephen Daniel Cord. And he left for work back on July 18th, 2023. And about a mile down the road from where he left, he was pulled over. The police placed him in handcuffs. They drove him back to his house. And when he got back to his house,
There were multiple law enforcement agencies there from the Utah Attorney General's Office, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, and really big fires, and the Box Elder County Sheriff's Office and several other agencies swarming in and around his home, as the report I'm reading is saying.
Well, thank goodness he didn't live in Illinois and possess 38 rounds of ammo, as per our last episode. Mr. Cord said, I'm thinking, you know, I was thinking that there had to be some kind of a misunderstanding. I have no idea what this could be about. But he soon found out that they were accusing him of stealing guns from the place he worked at at Doug's Shooting Sports on Redwood Road there. I'm trying to figure out what state this is in.
But he was actually charged with five counts of retail theft, which were all second-degree felonies. So he was facing some hard freaking time. Another guy that worked with him named Matthew Provard, he also worked there at the same place. He was charged also. And about a month later, they coerced him into a guilty plea. He pled guilty to retail theft.
which was then reduced down to a Class A misdemeanor, and then they dropped the other felony charge. And then in doing that, Mr. Cord was prompted, or they were trying to prompt him to say, hey, follow your buddy's lead here and take a plea deal. Yeah, we want a win.
That's really what this was. You don't want to fight the government. Come on, take the win. Well, take the loss. We take a win and you don't do as much time or you don't or you do no time at all. It's just a misdemeanor. You do probation and you never own a gun again. Probably. I don't know. But.
He said, no, and this was his statement. He says, I will not plead out to something I didn't do in the first place. If that's a hill I need to die on, then so be it. Amen. Amen, Mr. Cord. I'm of the same mindset, especially when people try to accuse me of gun violence just simply because I own a gun or accuse me of being part of the problem or an encourager of gun violence. I reject it categorically and good for you for standing on your principles. And by the way,
If you know you are innocent, never take a freaking plea deal. Never, ever. It'll probably kill your chances, if I understand things right, in your appeals process. Don't quote me on that. I'm not an attorney. This sounds like something for General Counsel Eric Friday of Florida Carry. But I would never take a plea deal because I will never agree to a lie.
especially one that condemns me. If you want to condemn me for something, I'm sure there's a big laundry list the devil could hand you, but you don't get to assign guilt to me that I didn't earn. All right? And apparently Mr. Cord stood firm and he fought it. And he said later, and this was two and a half years later, he was exonerated finally.
He said that he felt like he was treated as if he was guilty until proven innocent. I'll tell you why you felt that way, Mr. Cord, because that's exactly what the government views you as. Guilty until proven innocent. And they will, what should I say, prosecute a raid upon your home with multiple agencies. I'm guessing there were six or seven involved by the way the story spoke.
Yeah, they will sick multi-agencies upon your home in an overwhelming show of force and violence to make you capitulate and then cop a plea deal and then wreck your, what should I say, your character in the eyes of your neighbors because they're thinking, well, good grief, man. Such a response like this. He obviously did something. No, the government.
is not always right as a matter of fact the government is uh seldom right yeah yeah so he's uh thankfully i should say this to mr cord be very grateful mr cord because since the atf was involved this could have turned into another patrick adamiak case or worse yet another brian malinowski case which you would not have survived all right now there are many reasons that
I have very serious reservations and distrust for modern day policing in many areas. I really do. Royce, you're a cop hater. Shut your pie hole. I can disagree with policing and police officers without being a cop hater. Okay. But I got some reservations and some distrust against them because it seems a lot of them were constitutionally dyslexic or
constitutionally ignorant altogether. And not to mention there seems to be this inherent corruption that power engenders in the ones that are too morally weak to resist the tyrannical impulses that this generates within them. And this next story is one of them because there was a young man who was jailed for 20 hours on a stolen gun charge. Now.
What do you automatically think when you hear somebody was arrested on a stolen gun charge? They did it. Just automatically, we think, yep, they did it. And this is why I have a problem with the government posting big arrests or even small arrests of people because it puts the state's case out there first and the man is automatically convicted in the court of public opinion before he ever makes it to a real court.
That's why I've got a problem with this crap. This young man is going to have to fight this reputation probably the rest of his days, not to mention the fact he has an arrest on his record now. Here's the story. He was arrested on a stolen gun charge. Turns out the gun was legal. I'm referencing heavily an article by Chris Nakamoto and Kevin Foster. This is out of New Roads, Louisiana.
An 18-year-old man spent 20 hours in jail this week after his attorney says,
wrongfully arrested him on felony charges for allegedly possessing a stolen gun that was not stolen. Maddox Livingston was pulled over Tuesday night for a burnt headlight and no license plate lights. According to his duty to inform, he informed the officers he had a weapon in his truck.
And you have a duty to inform in Louisiana. Here in Florida, you do not. Now, if they ask if you do have one, you can't say no when you do. If they find it later, now that's pretty bad news. But the police ran the gun's serial numbers and determined it was reported stolen from Florida. Okay, right off the bat, just on face value, you would assume that the state was right. And the police were right. They had to be.
I mean, there was a record that it was stolen from Florida. Mr. Livingston was booked, fingerprinted, and faced felony charges before his family produced documentation proving the gun was not stolen. He had said repeatedly, he had tried to tell officers repeatedly they could verify the gun's legal status. They ignored him. I want to know why.
Why would you ignore someone who says, I have exculpatory evidence that proves I am not guilty of what you are under suspicion that I have done? Why would you refuse that? Unless you're utterly corrupt. Unless you probably need your badge ripped off your chest and your stripes stripped off your sleeve and have your butt punted out to the curb.
and no longer a police officer. Why would you not do that, especially when you've got protect and serve on the side of your squad car? If your job is to serve, how is this young man served when you people, multiple cops in this one, would not bother to verify what the young man was saying? Here's what he said. He quote, he said, you can call my father. You can call the FFL dealer.
It will be proven in five minutes. I could be walking home, going to sleep in my bed tonight. But they kept saying, we don't want to hear it. Why not? Why would you not want to hear it? Who the blippity blank are you to say you know which evidence or facts are justified and which ones are not? Which ones are reasonable? Which ones aren't? Who are you people? You don't have that kind of right to do that. Protect and serve, huh?
District Attorney's Office refused the charges and issued a letter to the jail warden calling for Livingston's immediate release. Attorney Rob Marino, who is representing Livingston, said the incident highlights other ongoing problems also with the New Roads Police Department. Mr. Marino said that, this is his quote, if I were the mayor and I were on the city council,
I would abolish the New Roads Police Department. Okay, that's a problem. Come on, Royce, what's this got to do with the Second Amendment? Well, obviously everything, this guy's carrying a legal gun, legally purchased, legally carrying it, and he's going to jail for gun theft of his own freaking gun. That's why. That's the import here. Not only this,
If they're that ignorant in this area, what other areas of gun law are they ignorant in? What other areas of the Second Amendment are they ignorant in? Ignorance in a police force is never a good thing for a citizenry. Okay, yeah, because ignorant people are weak people, and weak people are cruel people.
The New Roads Police Department has faced intense scrutiny recently. The WAFBI team obtained exclusive body camera footage of Officer John Chambliss shooting John Sexton, the son of an Iberville Parish elected official, while Sexton was having a mental health crisis last year. Sexton was shot multiple times and criminally charged, but a grand jury found that he had committed no crimes.
Chambliss resigned via text message in February. Well, hopefully you're going to pursue it further than a resignation. It says the I-team reported that Chambliss worked for 11 different departments in recent years, some more than twice.
That's never a good sign when you have an officer rotating from department to department to department. That should tell everybody and usually does tell everybody and usually does signify that the person is a problem and doesn't need to be a freaking cop. From what I hear, there's one in Palm Bay where I used to live that has quite a problem with a violent temper and putting his hands on people unnecessarily.
Yes, unnecessary force. Where do they get these from? You pass these guys around to different departments like a freaking blunt at a Snoop Dogg concert, and you wonder why you're getting these kind of repercussions? This is a problem because the police force should represent the people. They took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, but these guys just out of hand? Dismiss?
exculpatory evidence this kid's trying to proffer them yeah well a lot of this has to do with the fact that of this this propaganda in the united states going on since 1934 that the people should not be trusted with arms and with multiple gun control laws being passed creating very bad precedence in this country
It's hardly any wonder that anti-Second Amendment garbage and anti-Bill of Rights crap like this are eventually going to be foisted upon the American people through the police forces. And that's what we're seeing. Constitutional ignorance is no excuse. If ignorance of the law is no excuse for any American,
then constitutional ignorance is the excuse of no police officer, no legislator, no judge, no public servant whatsoever. This young man had no prior criminal record, and now he says his trust for law enforcement has totally been shaken to the core. Well, gee, I wonder why. Oh, but we're supposed to go, oh, that's okay, honest mistake. No, you don't.
get to make these kind of mistakes when you've been given this kind of power power over our freedom power over our movement and yes literally power over our lives you don't get to make those kind of mistakes we'll take a brief commercial time out we'll be back with more shooting straight radio podcast don't go anywhere because the listener retention squads are all on standby when we come back
We're going to take a look at the Firearm Owner Protection Act, or also known as some people that's equated with the Hughes Amendment of 1986. And we're going to show you some things that you're going to be surprised the FOPA does not say regarding a certain cutoff date of manufacture for machine guns.
I'll tell you what we're talking about when we come back. Don't go anywhere.
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 III and NFA weapons, ammo and accessories, gunsmithing. 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 store in North Melbourne. They also have a fine selection of gun safes to choose from. Check them out at Sicario'sGunShop.com. Make sure you tell them you heard about them on Shooting Straight. Sicario's 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. Before the break, I told you we would be diving into the Firearm Owner Protection Act.
Now, remember, I've said on this program before that a bad legal precedent and bad legal precedents are tyranny's best friend because it gains a foothold, an anti-liberty foothold in the judicial system and becomes almost case law sometimes when actually some of these rulings are not.
what people think they are. And some of these laws passed don't say what some people think they do. A bad precedent is apparently why the overwhelming majority of gun owners believe that the Firearm Owner Protection Act, that in there we're told we're not allowed to own any fully automatic weapons manufactured after 1986. But does the Firearm Owner Protection Act really say that?
I'm simply going to read you an article from Ammo Land, and it doesn't give the exact author, but it's by their editorial staff. And it's brilliant. They have done their homework, and I could not possibly expound on this subject any better than what they've done here. So I'm going to read to you now, boys and girls. All right. For nearly four decades, American gun owners have been told a simple story.
If a machine gun was made after 1986, civilian ownership is flatly illegal. End of discussion. That narrative has been repeated so often, in other words, that precedent, that it is treated as an unquestionable fact in gun shops, in courtrooms, and even in conservative circles. And I'll confess that I thought that's what it said, too. Okay.
But what if that story isn't actually what Congress wrote? In ATF Regulation 27 CFR 479.105, which governs the transfer and possession of machine guns under the NFA, it primarily implements the restrictions established by the FOPA of 1986.
which effectively banned the possession and transfer of machine guns manufactured after May 19, 1986 for most civilians. For almost 40 years, gun owners have been told the same line. If a machine gun was made after 1986, you can't have it, period. That claim traces back to the so-called Hughes Amendment.
passed as part of the FOPA codified in 18 U.S.C. 922. But here's the part most people never hear. The law's text does not say what the ATF later claimed. In other words, 1986 is the cutoff date. The ban we've lived under since the 1980s did not come straight from Congress. It came from the ATF, quote-unquote, interpreting...
the statute during the political climate of the 1980s, when the agency was still under the Treasury Department and anti-gun bureaucrats were flexing hard. The key language in 18 U.S.C. Statute 922-02A states that the machine gun prohibition shall not apply with respect
to a transfer to or by or possession by or under the authority of the United States or a state. Listen carefully. I'm trying to be as clear as possible. For nearly four decades, that clause has been narrowly read by regulators and most courts. But the phrase under the authority of is not self-defining. It is the pressure point. One plausible reading.
and the one embedded in federal regulation is that quote-unquote under the authority of means possession that is directed, controlled, or specifically requested by a government entity. That interpretation appears in 27 CFR 479105, which limits
post-1986 machine gun registration to firearms manufacturer for the benefit of a government agency and at its request. Now, that was a very fallacious interpretation of that, by the way. That 27 CFR, statute 479.105, paragraph E, that's ATF regulation, okay? So those phrases do not appear.
I looked through that statute. I can't find anywhere in there that says, you know, cut off sales after anything manufactured after 1986. What they do is present the agency's understanding of what under the authority of must mean. Okay. Let me read that one more time. Those phrases do not appear. They represent the agency's understanding.
of what quote-unquote under the authority of must mean. A competing litigation theory would argue that the state's text can bear a broader interpretation. The term authority ordinarily refers to legally granted power. States routinely exercise authority through licensing regimes, permits, or statutory authorization.
Under this view, if a state affirmatively authorizes possession of a specific class of arms, that possession is, by definition, under the authority of that state. The statute does not explicitly require the firearm to be manufactured at the government's request or solely for government use. That limitation comes from ATF regulation and not from the legislative tab.
Okay, are you getting this so far? Yes, this 1986 thing was a fallacy that's not in the statute written and passed by Congress. That's something crafted by the ATF, which is what I think whoever's involved with that should face charges for. But anyway, good luck with that.
Historically, courts have sided with the narrower interpretation. In the case Farmer v. Higgins, the 11th Circuit upheld ATF's refusal to register a newly manufactured machine gun for civilian possession. The court treated statute 922, paragraph 0, as at least ambiguous. They relied on legislative history, suggesting Congress intended to close
the civilian machine gun registry after 1986. How about that? They relied on legislative history that suggested Congress allegedly intended to close the civilian machine gun registry after 1986. I want to know, how do they know that that couldn't be interpreted the other way?
What if they were saying flat out, we don't need a registry for machine guns? I'd rather see it going that way. But anyway, the court also deferred to ATF's interpretation as reasonable, that is the Chevron deference doctrine, whether labeled explicitly as Chevron deference or as traditional agency deference, the practice, or I'm sorry, the practical effect was the same.
The agency's narrow reading prevailed. The legal landscape shifted in 2024 with Loper-Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, where the Supreme Court rejected mandatory Chevron deference, so courts are no longer required to accept an agency's interpretation merely because a statute is ambiguous. Judges must now exercise independent judgment, which is what they should have been doing all along,
in determining the best reading of the law. Yeah, if you can find a judge that's not a flaming communist activist that actually upholds the Constitution and the rule of law, yeah, you might get lucky there. Anyway, the article continues. That change does not automatically invalidate the ATF rule 479.105, but it does reopen the interpretive question.
A future challenge could argue that courts should reevaluate Statute 922, paragraph O from the ground up, focusing on ordinary meaning, statutory structure, and constitutional context rather than starting from decades of regulatory practice.
Such a case would likely arise if a state enacted legislation expressly authorizing possession of post-1986 machine guns under defined conditions and a qualified applicant sought NFA regulation. Okay, what they're saying here is then we should create a test case. We need a state, and apparently there's a couple of them, Kentucky and Virginia, West Virginia.
who are now talking about selling former agency guns, fully automatic ones, back to the citizenry. Well, good. I think that's a good thing for them to do. And if any of them were made after 1986, I think there needs to be a challenge against the interpretation that the ATF has been oppressing people under for the last 40 freaking years.
If ATF denied the application under 479.105, the dispute would present a clean legal question, and here it is. Does the term under the authority of a state permit state-authorized civilian possession, or is it limited to firearms possessed for government use? That's a very good question. By the way, how about throwing this out there?
We allegedly have a government of, by, and for the whom? The people. If the people are the government, then the government is the people. And if the government is allowed to have fully automatic weapons, well, then guess what? The people get them too. And not just by that particular principle I just mentioned, but more so because of the Second African Amendment and the word arms and what it means.
The litigation would force a court to decide, without Chevron's thumb on the scale, whether the regulatory language requiring manufacture for the benefit of a government entity is the best reading of statute 922, paragraph 0, or whether it reflects a policy judgment layered onto the statute. I'm going to guess the latter, okay?
Framed this way, the issue is not whether Congress banned machine guns in 1986. It did enact statute 922, paragraph 0. The narrower and more contestable question is how far the exception extends and whether the regulatory interpretation that has controlled for nearly 40 years is textually compelled or historically assumed.
As gun owners, we've been living under an agency rewrite of that law for almost 40 years. The video breaks down the legal mechanics. There's a video in this article that I'm reading. The bigger point is simple. When bureaucrats stretch statutes beyond their meaning, rights disappear. Amen. When courts stop deferring and start reading the text and the history,
Freedom has a chance. This is something that the entirety of our government system needs to get a hold of. They really do. And especially police departments these days. Police departments out there, listen to me. I'll back you as long as you remain true to your oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. But as soon as you start loaning your power to tyrants,
And you start doing stupid things like arresting people for stolen guns when they've got exculpatory evidence to prove that it wasn't stolen. And when you start doing things like the ATF has been doing since their inception, and when you start treating the general public as if we're your servants, then that's a problem.
It's a bad problem because it crosses the Constitution, which crosses our rights. And when our rights start getting suppressed, once tyranny gains a foothold, and once it gains steam, it becomes a juggernaut. It becomes a juggernaut unless there is an armed intended victim standing in its way. And that's why you see this crap happening in all the heavily gun-controlled states more than anything.
or heavily gun-controlled cities, or blue cities in general, like Austin, Texas, and such. Wherever you see these heavy gun control laws, that's where you see the most abuse of people and their rights.
referenced in the last episode where three different government agencies and SWAT teams and armored vehicles descended upon a young man for possessing 38 rounds of ammunition. Yeah, that kind of crap. Gun control and tyranny go hand in hand. They really do. They always have
And they always will. That's why we all need to go ahead and solidify right now in our hearts that we will never comply with any gun control. And it needs to be made known to the people in government. They need to know that if they cross certain lines, we have the right to shoot them. I don't mean hunt them down and shoot them. I mean defend ourselves with firearms if they come trying to enforce.
ungodly, constitutionally repugnant gun control laws against us. Now, I'm not ready to die on the 1986 machine gun hill yet, but this thing needs a rework. Plus, oh, by the way, there are three different civil rights groups now that are suing.
the federal government to shut down the nfa it has no basis and no reason for existing at this point other than creating a registry for the government to use against the people stay strapped stay armed stay loaded make sure you got one in the chamber keep extra magazines on your person make sure you've got trauma supplies keep a carbine in your vehicle keep a battle belt battle vest whatever you got
Keep it handy. I hope we don't need this at all, but all indications are that we may very soon. I will catch you on the next episode. Stay in contact with your reps. And never forget, incoming rounds always have the right of way. Voice out.