101 Reasons Why I Oppose Gun Safety & You Probably Do Too

Second Amendment But Liars Democrats Fake Lies
101 Reasons Why I Oppose Gun Safety & You Probably Do Too

New Jersey – -(AmmoLand.com)- Here are 101 reasons why I oppose the so-called “Gun Safety” thrown around by gun banners and politicians.

  1. When “Gun Safety” is used as Propaganda.
  2. When honest citizens are turned into criminals in the name of “Gun Safety.”
  3. When groups claiming to want “Gun Safety” provide no gun safety training programs that teach the actual safe use of guns.
  4. When the NRA – the #1 genuine Gun Safety organization – is attacked by those claiming to support “Gun Safety.”
  5. When “Gun Safety” has been hijacked by the anti-2nd Amendment Lobby.
  6. When “Gun Safety” is a Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing used to eviscerate firearm freedoms.
  7. When “Gun Safety” is merely cover for Bloomberg’s purchased politicians and anti-gun front groups.
  8. When “Gun Safety” is a dog whistle for The Left.
  9. When confiscation of citizens’ firearms is done in the name of “Gun Safety.”
  10. When celebrities – who misuse weapons in movies and on TV – demand “Gun Safety.”
  11. When Internet videos and TV programs showing lawful gunsmithing are banned in the name of “Gun Safety.”
  12. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban affordable handguns so that the poor are left defenseless.
  13. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban semiautomatic rifles
  14. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban semiautomatic shotguns.
  15. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban expensive handguns.
  16. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban so-called “high capacity magazines.”
  17. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban .50 caliber firearms.
  18. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban modern sporting rifles.
  19. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban homemade firearms.
  20. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban custom-built firearms.
  21. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban pistol braces.
  22. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban barrel shrouds.
  23. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban folding stocks.
  24. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban pistol grips.
  25. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban bayonet lugs.
  26. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban threaded barrels.
  27. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban telescoping stocks.
  28. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban sniper rifles.
  29. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban so-called “ghost guns.”
  30. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban hollow nose ammunition.
  31. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban “silencers.”
  32. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban so-called “cop-killer bullets” (that have never killed a cop).

  33. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban concealed carry.
  34. When “Gun Safety” is used to oppose national carry reciprocity.
  35. When “Gun Safety” is used to oppose a Supreme Court Nominee.
  36. When “Gun Safety” is used to create arbitrary and secret gun disqualification categories such as a “No Fly” list.
  37. When actual Gun Safety is not taught in schools in the name of “Gun Safety.”
  38. When “Gun Safety” is used to ban target shooting with your kids.
  39. When “Gun Safety” is used to lockdown gun stores.
  40. When “Gun Safety” is used to lockdown gun ranges.
  41. When “Gun Safety” is used to create a registration database.
  42. When “Gun Safety” is used to impose waiting periods to purchase a gun (while criminals do not wait).
  43. When “Gun Safety” is used to impose waiting periods to purchase ammunition (while criminals do not wait).
  44. When “Gun Safety” is used to require trigger-locks or disassembly so that guns cannot be used to defend our homes.
  45. When “Gun Safety” is used to have doctors and nurses ask us questions that are unrelated to medical health.
  46. When “Gun Safety” is used to hold gun manufacturers liable for criminal misuse of their product.
  47. When “Gun Safety” is used to hold gun dealers liable for misuse of guns by criminals.
  48. When “Gun Safety” is used to arbitrarily deny gun permits.
  49. When “Gun Safety” is used by social media to de-platform 2nd Amendment advocates.

  50. When “Gun Safety” is used by social media to block 2nd Amendment advocates.
  51. When “Gun Safety” is used by social media to suspend 2nd Amendment advocates.
  52. When “Gun Safety” is used by social media to restrict 2nd Amendment advocates.
  53. When “Gun Safety” is used by social media to demonetize 2nd Amendment advocates.
  54. When “Gun Safety” is used by anti-gun rights advocates to immediately politicize a mass shooting.
  55. When “Gun Safety” is used to excessively tax guns.
  56. When “Gun Safety” is used to excessively tax ammunition.
  57. When “Gun Safety” is used to claim “real men” don’t own guns.
  58. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on sexual orientation.
  59. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on gender.
  60. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on a physical disability.
  61. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on race.

  62. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on ethnicity.
  63. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on religious beliefs.
  64. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on culture.
  65. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on language.
  66. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on economic class.
  67. When “Gun Safety” is used to discriminate against gun purchasers based on political opinions.
  68. When “Gun Safety” is used to claim a public health epidemic.
  69. When “Gun Safety” is used to justify anti-gun Presidential Executive Action.
  70. When “Gun Safety” is used to close the so-called “gun show loophole”
  71. When “Gun Safety” is used to lie about so-called “common-sense gun laws”
  72. When “Gun Safety” is used to take so-called “weapons of war” “off the street.”
  73. When “Gun Safety” is used to claim that guns should only be allowed for hunting.
  74. When “Gun Safety” is used to restrict the number of guns a person may own.
  75. When “Gun Safety” is used to take away 2nd Amendment Rights for a misdemeanor conviction.
  76. When “Gun Safety” is used to take away 2nd Amendment Rights for a non-violent felony conviction.
  77. When “Gun Safety” is used to increase the waiting period on a NICS delay (from 3 days to 10 days) before a gun transfer is allowed.
  78. When “Gun Safety” is used by colleges and universities to ban campus carry.
  79. When “Gun Safety” is used to end the online sale of guns.
  80. When “Gun Safety” is used to end the online sale of ammunition.
  81. When “Gun Safety” is used to end the online sale of gun parts and accessories.
  82. When “Gun Safety” is used to justify “Red Flag” property confiscation without Due Process.
  83. When “Gun Safety” is used to require, under the threat of criminal prosecution, unreliable and dangerous “smart gun” technology.
  84. When “Gun Safety” is used to require, under the threat of criminal prosecution, the reporting of lost or stolen guns.
  85. When “Gun Safety” is used to “buy back” guns the government never owned in the first place.
  86. When “Gun Safety” ignores Thomas Jefferson: “Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.” (I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.)

  87. When “Gun Safety” again ignores Thomas Jefferson: “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
  88. When “Gun Safety” again ignores Thomas Jefferson: “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
  89. When “Gun Safety” further ignores Thomas Jefferson: “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
  90. When “Gun Safety” still ignores Thomas Jefferson: “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be your constant companion of your walks.”
  91. When “Gun Safety” ignores Benjamin Franklin: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
  92. When “Gun Safety” again ignores Benjamin Franklin: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
  93. When “Gun Safety” ignores Noah Webster: “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”
  94. When “Gun Safety” ignores William Pitt (the Older): “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”
  95. When “Gun Safety” ignores Richard Henry Lee: “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
  96. When “Gun Safety” ignores Patrick Henry: “The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
  97. When “Gun Safety” ignores Samuel Adams: “The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
  98. When “Gun Safety” ignores George Mason: “To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.”
  99. When “Gun Safety” ignores Zachariah Johnson: “The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.”
  100. When “Gun Safety” ignores Dachau Survivor Theodore Haas: “These Sarah Brady types must be educated to understand that because we have an armed citizenry, a dictatorship has not happened in America. These anti-gun fools are more dangerous to liberty than street criminals or foreign spies.”
  101. When “Gun Safety” ignores that the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not be Infringed.”

I will oppose “Gun Safety” when it is being used as a lie to fool the public. I resent the destruction of its true meaning and its use for political purposes to take away our rights.
As a Certified Firearms Instructor and responsible gun owner, I will always support TRUE GUN SAFETY.

About Evan Nappen

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Host of the praised “Gun Lawyer” Podcast, author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, weapons history, and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades, it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry, and national media outlets. Called on regularly by radio, television, and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news, Evan has appeared on countless shows including Fox, CNN, Court TV, WOR-New York. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

Evan Nappen
Evan Nappen
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Super good article. It really paints a good picture of what is happening, of course only 2nd amendment supporters understand it.

A lot of people are complaining about gun control in their posts. I still think gun control is a steady aim and to change what it means to something else is pure garbage.

Concealed carry for a safer America..

Last edited 1 year ago by musicman44mag

The foundation of propaganda is twisted language. In these examples we see how wanna-be totalitarians twist language to confuse and misdirect conversations. The folks who know nothing about the safe, responsible and lawful use and security of firearms are the ones trying to lecture those of us who have literally spent our lives doing exactly those things. Call out propagada where ever you see it. Destroy misnomers like “assault weapon” and “high capacity.” Do not allow those terms to be used in conversation or in articles without calling them out and destroying their veracity. In this war against the left… Read more »


nrringlee . . . The Communist Democrap Left in this country is well versed in “newspeak”! You are probably already aware, but if anyone wants to see where we are headed under the Communist Democraps read “1984”! It is the Communist Playbook and they are running it!!!!

Doug G.

There can be no effective discussion or compromise until both sides (but mainly the anti-gun lobby) agree to be open, honest and reject hyperbole, exaggerated offence and stick to one stated goal (not moving the goal posts).


Doug G. . . . The only effective discussion or “compromise” we will ever reach with the Communist (anti-Second Amendment) Democrap Party Left is when they have our gun barrel in their collective mouths!!!


The only “discussion or compromise” with the “other side” might be about how much higher than five hundred feet they wish to be when they exit the helicopter.


HEAR, HEAR, Evan !!!!!!!


Thank you, Mr. Nappen! You are one of the FEW lawyers that I can respect and with which I agree!!!


Michigan was guilty of no 61 the “Green Card” AKA Safety Inspection was just he he penned it…


As long as we have the 2nd we have half a chance to keep this nation. If we stay armed, and don’t back down like a lot of sheeple, our enemies dare not invade. Therein lies the problem. I pray that I will never have to draw down on another human being, but at the same time I pray that I will not falter if that time should ever present itself, and I have no other choice. For all you with the false bravado, until you take some ones life, be quiet. It’s like Will Money said in Unforgiven; You… Read more »

Dave in Fairfax

You don’t need a 2A. It “GRANTS” you nothing. The right of self defense is given when you first suck down air. As long as you are willing to stand on your feet rather than submit on your knees You have what you need. this is a classic Come to Jesus moment. Get right and we’ll see you on the other side.


Hey, hoss . . . The biggest threat we have as “citizens” to our God-given rights under the Bill of Rights is our own Oligarchial Federal Government government!!! The first step to government reform on the federal level is TERM LIMITS FOR CONGRESS!!! Obviously, they will NEVER impose term limits on themselves! As citizens, what are we going to do about that?


You are the EXACT poster child for those that want to take guns away. You have no ability to see anything outside your limited view. I own guns, I have lived in VERY differing states as far as gun laws are concerned Actually, I’ve lived in polar opposites. And they are both WRONG. you, and the anti-you are equally stupid. Find a middle ground, or there will be laws enacted that neither of us like. EG: make every state have a minimal training, but then every state has to honor the others CCW’s NY is not going to be KY,… Read more »

J Gibbons

Sadly, there is no middle ground anymore on so-called “gun safety.” The Fascist Marxist Progressives have moved from compromise to a desire and fight for complete disarmament. At the policy leadership level, they have desire for any kind of compromise that doesn’t exist in the 2nd. It simply isn’t there. Any compromise is fundamentally opposed to the natural right to keep and bear arms that is supposed to be protected in the Constitution. The author is correct in that few, if any, of the 101 things done in the name of “gun safety” actually do anything measurable to make the… Read more »


I agree. When the premise is wrong, the argument is typically wrong. The premise of “gun violence” is wrong and the argument for “gun control” is wrong.

What is funny is the hard core advocates of “gun control” agree with the above statement and know that they are not pushing “gun control” at all – it is “people control.” They are laughing their asses off at the 60% of the country that have swallowed all the lies.


J Gibbons – I’m all for middle ground. Maybe we need a federal law requiring all cities to provide tax-free ground in the middle of town for gun shop(s) and a public range. 🙂

There are individuals who I don’t think should have a gun, I have a right to think whatever I want, but not to impose those thoughts on others. My home is the only place I have the right to require disarmament by anyone – however if I don’t trust someone to have a gun, I don’t trust them enough to allow them in my home.


Well, Mike;
I missed that part of the 2nd amendment that says the people have the right to keep and bare arms if they have training and state approval. And good work calling others stupid. I’m sure you’ve proved your point most eloquently. As for as “the EXACT poster child for those that want to take guns away” I think you need to check the mirror. Finally, I haven’t met a dipshit gun controller yet who hasn’t managed to get in the “I own guns,but crap. Go back over to the Huffington Post where you’ll be appreciated.


How about those guys who say something like:

“I’m for smaller government and I believe in free markets, but . . .
there are some products for which I feel the government should control prices and/or quantities sold so I can buy some at a price I feel is fair.”

What do you think about those guys?




Not at all – Terry believes the government shouldn’t be powerful enough to tell us what firearms we should have and he mocks people who say “I own guns, but . . . ” So far so good.

However, he thinks the government should have the power to tell businesses how to price and distribute their products.

I don’t think that is a good idea, do you?


“However, he thinks the government should have the power to tell businesses how to price and distribute their products.”
Now how in the hell did you deduce that from what I said to Mike? What empirical data do you have to show that’s what I believe?
And no, I don’t believe that at all. I didn’t respond because I wasn’t glued to a keyboard.


It was from your comments in the ammo thread.


Terry, what is your position on government involvement in ammo prices/distribution?

I re-commented on the other thread in which you advocated for government intervention.


I made no comment on any other thread yesterday. (This was the only comment I’ve made in at least a week. There is another “Terry” who’s on Ammoland. I was here long before he started commenting. I wish he’d find some other place to go (especially if that’s his dumb-ass opinion).


Oh, sorry man. I’m surprised they allow two of the same user names.

Big Government Terry wants the government to control ammo manufacturers and the entire distribution channel so he can buy the quantity he wants at the price he wants

I will now refer to you as Small Government Terry.

Again, sorry about that – I had no idea.


I posted an apology earlier, but it was censored.

Sorry about making that comment to you – I had no idea the system allowed two of the same user names.

As far as the other Terry, he apparently is a protected class. Even though I only described his views, I was censored.


The “yeah buts” are all the same. “Yeah, I’m all for liberty… but not for others. Only for me”
They tend to ‘think’ in that old cliche; Fine for me, but not for thee. Because they’re so much better than you and me… they ‘think’!
They are legends in their own minds… 🙂


Lot’s of people want the government to make things better. It doesn’t work – that’s how we got to where we are.


A government that can do EVERYTHING for you can do ANYTHING to you!


Agreed, and it’s on the way.


Can you get me a link to the comments made by the other”Terry”? I’d like to drop him a line when I get some time.


Here you go – it took me a while to finally get an answer from him about what he thought should be done about the “gouging”



Thanks much. Sorry about the misunderstanding – I left him a reply. I’m hoping he’ll change the “Terry”. Like I said, I was here long before he showed up. I seldom make comments unless I see something like “Mike” was postulating. They make my skin crawl!


No problem. You should post more. You may want to start each post with “This is small-government-Terry.” 🙂

It’s unfortunate so many in the firearm community advocate for a larger, more powerful government in the hope it will solve what they perceive to be a problem.




The “compromise” and “middle ground” was reached a long time ago.

You wrote: “make every state have a minimal training . . . ”

How about make every state do absolutely nothing.

A large percentage of government employees are extremely unsafe with firearms. Let’s have a committee of non-government employees provide oversight on the government employees. What do you think about that idea?


– States should “do something”. The state of firearms training in our population is atrocious. Given necessity of a functional militia, I think states should provide anonymous and optional training – providing some amount of instruction, ammo and range time. Furthermore I think states should include real firearms training as part of their public education. By “real training” I mean how to safely and effectively use firearms (including live fire) rather than gun “safety”/restriction they push.

I’m going to guess this does not fall into the “middle ground” is so fond of.


Mike wanted to “make” every state do something. I suggested the federal government “make” every state do absolutely nothing. There is far too much “I think something should be done, so let’s make somebody do something.” Such as, “I feel ammo prices are too high, let’s ‘make’ the ammo companies sell at lower prices.” Government is not the solution. I agree the average person should be better trained. I don’t think the federal government should “make” the states do anything about it. Furthermore, I don’t think the states should be the entities providing the training. Taxpayers should not pay for… Read more »


@JSNMGC – I actually agree without you. Need to find a “tongue in cheek” emoji to go with statements as above. Seriously though, I do think that @Mike’s idea of middle ground is far different from ours. I agree with @TLS that a government powerful enough to do Førby you, is a government powerful enough to do to you. Case in point is pandemic response. While community care is necessary, i do not care forced restrictions. I certainly do not approve of the massive deficit spending of 2020. We were badly in debt in 2019, we are now in a… Read more »



Totalitarians are laughing at the very people they pander to with government spending.

They aren’t trying to help anyone. Everything they do is aimed at overloading the system. Once it all collapses, they can say “see, a Constitutional Republic with a market based on capitalism doesn’t work. Here’s what we need to do . . . “


Training provided by non-government employees to the FBI could include:

  • Don’t go to a night club and do backflips to impress young females when your pistol is not secured. In fact, it’s best not to do backflips while armed if you can restrain yourself from doing so; and
  • If you do drop your pistol on a crowded dance floor, do not put your finger inside the trigger guard when you pick it up.

What do you think of this common-sense training for government employees?


“common sense” and “government employees” do not logically or practically fit in the same sentence.


Ahh, there are a lot of great government employees. However, I have very little patience for the hypocritical ones and/or the ones who have a passion for exerting their authority inappropriately.

Rebel VA

I am a retired govt employee. You cannot include all of us under one category. I was an instrument shop technician and computer operator in an avionics lab. I am a 2nd amdt advocate, 1st, 4th, 5th and so on. I do own some firearms and have a few rounds of ammo. PS, we techs never let engineers touch our equipment for fear they would screw it up! PS#2, Iretired from NASA.


@Rebel – Having been on the engineer side of that equation – I’ve always had great respect for technicians. As in most interactions – respect given gets respect back, working together gets better results with less overtime for all of us.

I imagine your experience is similar to mine – those who demand respect for their credentials and claim to be all knowing are usually the least competent. More common among engineers, but true for technicians as well.


So Mike, Look above at the 101 reasons and pick a few reasons that Evan has set forth in the list and tell us EXACTLY why he is wrong for listing them. I’m interested in what you think because I don’t see a one of the 101 reasons that shouldn’t be included in the 101st reason that covers all of the reasons that Mr. Nappen set forth in his list of 101 reasons. The Second Amendment covers them all. He doesn’t have a limited view. He has a very WIDE view. You however, I think is the one that can’t… Read more »


Mike… There IS NO “middle ground!” The opposing standpoints are indeed 100% mutually-exclusive. Compromise physically cannot occur… even the Fascist/Marxists (who refuse to consider the concept of “compromise” under any circumstances, anyway) recognize that simple and obvious fact. In early 2016, Homeland Security [Obama’s HS!] informed Congress in a formal White Paper – it’s in the Congressional Record – that civil war in this country IS inevitable and absolutely unavoidable. HS’s best guess was “within five years” – that is, by early 2021. Sadly, THAT is the only way to solve this issue (and a boatload of other issues, as… Read more »


I attempted to locate the DHS White Paper without success. Please provide a link or the title, date, other info to facilitate location ?


EG: make every state have a minimal training, Putting “the state” in CONTROL of “training” is a great first step to tyranny. How many states now have their own version of “disqualifying factors” for gun possession itself? You will have the same issue whenstates are controlling what constitutes “training”. SOme wil mandate a thousand dollar eighty hour training. Others will do nothing, letting Dad, uncles, the lccal gun club, handle it, as happened untio BATF were formed.. or Mayor Tim Sullivan “outlawed” handguns… but only when his rival gang members had them. Get real.. kids learn how to ride bokes,… Read more »


I agree – mandatory training will lead to abuse, just like “may issue” laws.


– Agreed. See other current article on corruption and bribery in Santa Clara, CA sheriff’s office. Given human nature, corruption is inevitable in such a system.

Maybe corruption is inevitable – so we need a system which minimizes impact of corruption by emphasizing individual rights. Man – almost every day I see reinforcement of my respect for the founding fathers. Bill-of-rights is a work of art.


I agree – they wrote extensively about the dangers of a large government.


. “middle ground” makes clear you are not capable of understanding what an “unalienable, G_d-given right” means. As well you don’t understand that we as “of, by and for” do not have to negotiate with our government; or suffer “tyranny” of either the “majority” or “minority”. … But, “freedom is not free” and even the blood of those who would compromise might eventually be shed to realize and then perpetuate “freedom” as this country was contemplated.


A middle ground? You give the proponents of gun restrictions (gun control) an inch and they’ll demand more. The bottom line is, behind the mask of “rational” or “sensible” is the deep desire to restrict to the point of denying, and therefor eliminating a civil right enshrined in the Bill of Rights.


Butters and Fudds are cancer. People like Mike are the reason we have all this infringement. If every gun owner actually supported the 2A then the anti-gunners wouldn’t have the numbers to enact arms control.


MIKE . . . BUD, YOU ARE DEAD WRONG, PARTICULARLY WITH YOUR INCENDIARY LANGUAGE AND NAME CALLING! The language of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is perfectly clear no matter what the scum sucking, control freak Communist Party Left says. ” . . . the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” THAT IS THE LAW OF THE LAND, NOT SOME WANNA’ BE COMMUNISTS LIKE NY, NJ, THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF KALIFORNIA; ETC., DECIDIING TO CONTRAVENE THE U.S.CONSTITUTION ALONG WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!! We have “compromised” our constitutional rights now to… Read more »