Democrats work to abolish 2nd amendment merely because the FBI suspects you

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.


Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

Fascists: Senate Democrats are teaming up with a handful of Republicans to re-introduce a bill that would allow the federal government to instantly suspend the second amendment constitutional rights of anyone the FBI happens to declare a suspect.

If the FBI believes there’s a reasonable chance someone is going to use a gun in a terrorist attack, it should be able to make that determination and block the sale,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told a conference call on Monday.

No due process, no conviction, no actual evidence of wrong-doing is needed. Though the law tries to define what the FBI’s determinations should be based on, all the FBI and the federal government would really have to do is declare you a suspect. In other words, if they don’t like you — for example you happen to be a member of a tea party group that opposes Barack Obama, or you happen to be an Occupy Wall Street protester who opposes Donald Trump — they can cancel your second amendment rights and bar you from owning guns.



  • Calvin Dodge

    And since the FBI cleared the Florida killer (“oh, his coworkers are RACIST!”), such a bill wouldn’t have even slowed him down.

  • wodun

    Not sure why this isn’t “racist” but Trump’s proposal to pause immigration from active terror countries is.

    Also, if these people are so dangerous they shouldn’t have a gun, why aren’t they in jail?

  • mpthompson

    I know that the “from in the boiling water” analogy is overused, but do we ever collectively pause to see what is going on in this country?

    We are suspending constitutional rights and introducing police state security in public life just so we can welcome a certain category of immigrants that instantly become a state protected class? This is insane at both a logical and emotional level.

    As Trump says about many things, this BS has got to stop.

  • Cotour

    We can not have everything, where on the line of caution and the limits of Constitutional law should we all meet and agree?

    Are the FBI / law enforcement able to have some reasonable criteria that would have identified these radical people out without violating their rights and eliminating them from being able to legally purchase firearms, at the moment apparently they do not? We apparently can only identify them after they perpetrate some heinous crime because rights might be violated?

    There has to be a reasonable leadership solution to this problem where Americans have access to their rights and bad actors can be identified and contained and / or taken out of society.

    (Where is the personal responsibility of those family members and friends who know of pending murderous actions who take no action what so ever? That is one of the keys to righting this current legal anomaly IMO.)

    This is the other edge of the sword of justice.

  • mpthompson

    Would a reasonable first step be that non-citizens cannot purchase or posses firearms within the U.S. with the cost of violation being immediate deportation? Wouldn’t have impeded Florida, but would perhaps impeded San Bernardino and it would give us a reasonable basis for deporting both legal and illegal criminals as they are found, hopefully before they commit crimes.

    It would be an incentive to non-citizens to become citizens and if someone is uncomfortable being in the country without a weapon, they can self deport.

  • Cotour


    Good suggestion.

    I happen to be listening to the Saun Hannity radio show and he is interviewing this guy who wrote this book “See something, Say nothing” A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission to Jihad.

    This is what IS going on, by orders from the top, no matter that Obama (the enemy within) denies it vehemently.

  • Edward

    Mr. Zimmerman wrote: “No due process, no conviction, no actual evidence of wrong-doing is needed.”

    Sounds just like asset forfeiture. Or the No Fly List. Pretty soon, they will be able to jail you just for suspicion of terrorist predilection, you know, like being a veteran, Christian, conservative, Republican, skeptical of global warming, or otherwise disagreeing with Obama.

    The problem is less that the terrorists get the guns (as if adding more laws will finally stop them from getting guns, bombs, knives, cars, fire, and the other weapons that they have used) and more that there are so many gun-free zones in which they have no fear of attacking.

    Pamela Geller’s example of how a gun-friendly zone is the safest zone should be the showcase that these politicians follow. Instead, they insist that being disarmed is the way to being safe from terrorists. It works so well in France, after all. And Norway.

    From the article: “Sen. Schumer said Feinstein’s bill ‘is carefully crafted’ to bar gun sales to people, ‘even if someone is not presently on a watch list.'”

    So you don’t even have to be suspected at all. If they don’t like the way you look, the name of your political party, you deny global warming, or for any reason they choose, you get to be denied your rights as a US citizen. It sounds just like the countries that the US opposed in the 20th century.

    From the article: “Schumer admitted, ‘You can get a semi-automatic weapon with a whole lot of clips, OK, even if we banned assault weapons.'”

    So even Schumer admits that bans do not stop terrorists. But it does stop the rest of us from defending ourselves and those around us. If a mere 1% of those at the Orlando nightclub had been armed, then the terror would have ended very quickly.

  • Cotour

    And Schumer and Feinstein exist within an insular world where highly trained and well armed guards surround and protect them most of the day and night.

    When they are willing to work in a place where they must call the police who must drive to the place of concern then you will know that they are intellectually honest. Until then, they are all intellectually dishonest and live by rules other than the that everyone else lives by.

    BS is BS not matter how you cut it up.

  • Cotour

    I just saw this and it illustrates the point perfectly.

    Instead of DHS focusing on the people that threaten us, who happen to be Islamic associated religious nuts redirect the focus of the conversation to law abiding Americans.

    The Federal Government fears Americans the most. More dishonesty, expect nothing less.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *