Connect with us

News

ICYMI: 2020 Dem Wants to Prosecute Gun Owners Who Don’t Hand Over ‘Assault Weapons’

Bye bye, Second Amendment!

John Salvatore

Published

on

Oh, looky here.

A 2020 Democrat presidential candidate wants to take your guns.

Keep running on that, Kirsten. It will go over well!

Trending: New York Court Tells Woman to Get Rid of Confederate Flag Garden Rock or Lose Her Daughter

From Daily Wire:

take our poll - story continues below

Did Derek Chauvin Receive Proper Due Process?

  • Did Derek Chauvin Receive Proper Due Process?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Presidential candidate Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) revealed on Wednesday she believes that instituting both a mandatory gun buyback program as well as criminally prosecuting American’s who refuse to hand those firearms over to the government are both “strong” ideas.

“On the assault weapons issue, you have talked openly about being in favor of an assault weapons ban. I’m interested if you are supportive of a mandatory buyback program for assault weapons,” CNN’s Poppy Harlow asked Gillibrand, noting that the proposal was also suggested by her primary challengers Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ)

Gillibrand noted, “I think we should ban assault weapons as well as large magazines, and as part of passing that ban, do a buyback program across the country so that those who own them can be compensated for their money that they spent. But I think both of those ideas are strong.

Reactions:

Not only did Kirsten blast the NRA but she said they care about profit from selling guns.

WATCH:

Kirsten Gillibrand: “The NRA is the worst organization in this country. They care more about their profits than the American people, they care more about selling guns to someone on the terror watch list or w/grave mental illness or who has a violent criminal background”

Here’s the problem…

-NRA is a non-profit & does *not* sell guns

-People opposed banning people who were on the terror watch list from buying guns because it would strip people of their rights without due process

-Violent criminals & grave mentally ill people are already banned from owning guns

More Gillibrand:

Democratic presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand: “I will make sure we ban the bump stocks…the assault rifles, the military-style weapons”

-Bump stocks are already banned

-Assault rifles/military style weapons were effectively banned in 1987

Chris Wallace calls out Kirsten Gillibrand over her gun-control plans, noting none of them would have stopped the Virginia Beach tragedy: “Is there anything you could have done that would have stopped this terrible incident?”

Gillibrand: “Yeah, stop being beholden to the NRA”

Kirsten Gillibrand: “Remember, after the shooting in Las Vegas [Trump] said, ‘we’re going to ban the bump stocks.’ Did he ban the bump stocks? No! Because the NRA came crashing down”

Fact: Trump *did* ban bump stocks after the Las Vegas shooting

Kirsten Gillibrand: “The NRA is lying to the American people, it is not about the Second Amendment. … [The NRA] wants to make sure an abuser who has a restraining order against him can buy a weapon”

News

Social Media Giant Permanently Banishes Pro-Life News Outlet

So much for free speech.

Published

on

1984

Our nation appears destined to fall into the clutches of a technological oligarchy, headed by the likes of Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg, and there is very little that can be done about it. These two men, who run Twitter and Facebook, respectively, have been ruling their public forums with an iron fist, hiding behind the concept that their private status is a workaround for the First Amendment.  Their gargantuan reach and influence has made it possible for them to act with impunity, steering the narrative on any number of subjects, from Donald Trump to the wonder of maternity. The latest affront to free speech comes to us from Facebook, where a pro-life news organization has been completely banished. Facebook permanently banned LifeSiteNews, a popular pro-life news outlet, for publishing “false information about COVID-19 that could contribute to physical harm.” As justification for unpublishing LifeSiteNews, Facebook cited an article posted on April 10, 2021, titled “COVID vaccines can be deadly for some.” Facebook said they erase Facebook pages that publish “vaccine discouraging information on the platform.” The site’s staff was livid. “This all comes down to another case of Big Tech silencing free speech on their platform,” said LifeSiteNews Marketing Director Rebekah Roberts. “Facebook has been silencing any voice that goes against their beliefs and agenda,” Roberts said. “Our LifeSiteNews Facebook page has been removed simply because we have shared reports of doctors, nurses, expert researchers, and even the former Pfizer VP speaking out against the COVID shots.” This is just the latest in a long line of Orwellian moves by these social media mavens, and may in fact be just another harbinger of something far more sinister to come.

Continue Reading

News

CDC Readies Cruises, Complete with Human Guinea Pigs

Fingers crossed!

Published

on

As the world prepares for its grand reopening, there are a number of high value industries that are eagerly awaiting permission from medical authorities to resume operations. First and foremost, there are the service industries:  Places like restaurants, bars, music venues, and sports arenas whose entire livelihood depends on whether or not people are being allowed to gather in public.  While many of these venues are now beginning to ramp up their capacity, there are issues bringing some of these workers back into the fold thanks to the enhanced unemployment benefits provided by the federal government. And then there’s the tourism industry, whose regulatory structure is far more susceptible to interference by government agencies. Now, after over a year of stagnation, it appears as though at least one facet of this wide-ranging corporate amalgam will be given a chance to sail on. Cruise lines can soon begin trial voyages in U.S. waters with volunteer passengers helping test whether the ships can sail safely during a pandemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gave ship operators final technical guidelines Wednesday for the trial runs. The CDC action is a step toward resuming cruises in U.S. waters, possibly by July, for the first time since March 2020. A spokeswoman for the cruise industry’s trade group said the group was reviewing the CDC instructions. So, how will this work? Each practice cruise — they’ll run two to seven days — must have enough passengers to meet at least 10% of the ship’s capacity. Volunteers must be 18 or older and either fully vaccinated or free of medical conditions that would put them at high risk for severe COVID-19. The ship operator must tell passengers that they are simulating untested safety measures “and that sailing during a pandemic is an inherently risky activity,” the…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week