Connect with us


Top 5 World Economic Forum Moments That Prove Elites View 1984 as a ‘How To’ Guide



What a week it has been, dear reader! I’ve been going deep into the World Economic Forum (WEF) Davos event, and I feel I’ll get an invite to attend next year. 

And who wouldn’t want to go?! You can travel in style in private jets and stay in luxurious hotel rooms. No doubt, eat some fantastic delicacies made primarily from alternative proteins like bugs, and of course, high-end prostitutes available at premium prices.

It’s essential to look back at the last few days and check out the WEF Davos 2023 greatest hits. So grab your coffee, settle in, and get ready to hear how the WEF knows best how we should live our lives.

Beam Me Up, John Kerry

It wouldn’t be a conversation on climate change without our Presidential envoy for Climate, John Kerry. He gave quite the amazingly ego-stroking speech on how special all of the attendees are for coming together into one room with the common goal of saving the world from itself.

He even claimed that the notion of saving the world made them all almost “extraterrestrial.” That’s someone who won’t need further stroking from the Davos ladies of the night; he’s been stroked enough.

He went on to say about their goals of saving the planet:

“If you say that to most people, most people think you’re just a crazy tree-hugging, lefty, liberal, you know, do-gooder or whatever and there’s no relationship.”

I assure you, John, nobody mistakes you as a ‘do-gooder.’

Daniel Turner, director of Power the Future, explains:

“We’re telling developing nations that we don’t want them to go through the process of developing, we don’t want them to have coal or natural gas or even nuclear.”

Instead, John Kerry and his ilk want these poorer countries to skip straight to unreliable wind and solar. Proving there is no relationship between doing anything good and forcing at-risk countries to have sources of energy that are more expensive and irregular sources of energy.

RELATED: According to the Elite, Controlling Citizen Movement Will Save the Planet

I Went To Davos, And All I Got Was Yelled At By Al Gore

Former Vice President and self-proclaimed internet inventor Al Gore was in rare form this year. Because nothing motivates people more than having some old dude scream at you about how much you’re screwing up his world.

Al Gore went off on how greenhouse gasses are destroying the atmosphere:

“That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs, and sucking the moisture out of the land, and creating the droughts, and melting the ice and raising the sea level, and causing these waves of climate refugees.”

Hell, why stop there, Al? Let’s go ahead and add some more blame; perhaps greenhouse gasses are also the cause of man buns, terrible reboots of 70s TV shows, jogger dress pants, all these mysterious heart ailments, and white supremacy!

It’s interesting to note that after leaving the White House begrudgingly after losing his Presidential bid, Al Gore set up a green investment firm called Generation Investment Management. This firm has been paying him $2 million monthly for his speeches.

He earned that paycheck this week. He’s crazy, crazy like a fox.

RELATED: Everyone’s Talking About the World Economic Forum. What is It?

Brian Stelter Grasps For Legitimacy

This week Davos allowed former CNN alum Brian Stelter, a disinformation enthusiast, to host a panel discussion on none other than hate speech and disinformation.

During this panel European Commission vice president Vera Jourova said:

“Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law.”

Did Brian ask her to explain why she thinks our country would disavow our First Amendment rights? Did he push back on the idea of making hate speech illegal?

Of course not! Because for him, hate speech is anything that goes against his narrative, it’s a good thing he’s considered an expert in the field of journalism.

If you were worried about Brian after he got sacked from CNN, don’t be. Not only did he get to attend Davos, and I have no doubt enjoy all of its spoils, he landed himself a fellowship at Harvard University.

What will be his duties at Harvard? Hosting panels on:

“threats to democracy and the range of potential responses from the news media.” 

The only response Brian knows is to stifle any information contrary to the left-wing propaganda machine.

RELATED: Update: German Police Insist Greta Thunberg’s ‘Arrest’ Is Legit Despite Video Evidence Suggesting Another Climate Change Grift

Let’s Be More Like China

While the WEF and members who attended Davos this year were quick to condemn Russia and boast about their lack of invitation, they didn’t seem to have a problem with China’s President Xi Jinping giving opening remarks. It shouldn’t be surprising; the head of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, was singing his praises just a few months ago.

Mr. Schwab told a Chinese state-affiliated media site:

“China is a role model for many countries.”

I’m sorry, I need a minute to stop laughing.

He went on:

“…the Chinese model is certainly a very attractive model for quite a number of countries.”

What model is he referring to? Perhaps the model of committing genocide or breeding out ‘undesirables’ like the Chinese government has done to the Uyghurs? 

Oh, wait, I bet it’s their model of state-controlled media, information, education, and movement of its citizenry. Take your pick, the kind of people who attend Davos love them all.

I Always Feel Like Somebody’s Watching Me

Finally, my favorite part is actually a flashback to Davos 2022, because it was just that great I think we should remember it again.

Australian Safety Commission Julie Grant said that the world would need to ‘recalibrate’ how it defines and views human rights. As if that’s not enough, she explained that she explicitly meant freedom of speech.

She’s not the only one who wants to turn the world into an oppressive surveillance state.

Last year Israeli professor Yuval Harari said at the event:

“COVID is critical because this is what convinces people to accept to legitimize total biometric surveillance.”

Because let’s not let a catastrophe go to waste; let’s use it to enslave the planet.

And it was last year that Alibaba Group president J. Michael Evans who said:

“We’re developing through technology an ability for consumers to measure their own carbon footprint.”

Cool right? Kind of like a pedometer thing; maybe it comes in different colors.

He went on to explain further:

“Where are they traveling? How are they traveling? What are they eating? What are they consuming on the platform?”

Oh, snap, so the plot of Minority Report or the reboot of Total Recall. That sounds terrifying, because it is. 

The best part is the “What are they consuming on the platform?” – i.e., what are you looking at online. Sounds pretty familiar if you followed the Twitter Files this year, someone was listening to Davos 2022, who knows what will come out of this year’s event.

Perhaps we will see a Ministry of Truth, Love, Peace, and Plenty. 

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,’//’); fbq(‘init’, ‘643288035726492’); fbq(‘track’, “PageView”);

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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


200 Years Ago, Davy Crockett Perfectly Explained the Limits on Government Spending – Not Yours to Give



By Col. Davy Crockett

Editor’s Note: This incredible story has long been a favorite among that segment of Americans who take the Constitution – and its limits on the federal government – seriously. In this tale, American hero Davy Crockett, then a Representative for the state of Tennessee, explains exactly why the Constitution doesn’t allow the government to spend money on anything it wants. Not even when our heartstrings are given a healthy tug. Ask yourself: how many American politicians serving right now would have the courage to do what Col. Crockett did?

[The following story about the famed American icon Davy Crockett was published in Harper’s Magazine in 1867, as written by James J. Bethune, a pseudonym used by Edward S. Ellis. The events that are recounted here are true, including Crockett’s opposition to the bill in question, though the precise rendering and some of the detail are fictional.]

One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Davy Crockett arose:

“Mr. Speaker–I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.

Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

RELATED: The Government is Trying to Figure Out How Many Programs They Run, Because They Don’t Know

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

“Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown . It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

“The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly.

“I began: ‘Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and–’

“‘Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett, I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’

“This was a sockdolager . . . I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

“‘Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth-while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. . . . But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is.’

RELATED: What the Jan 6 Committee Doesn’t Want You to Know, and More Importantly, Why

“‘I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question.’

“‘No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown . Is that true?’

“‘Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.’

“‘It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown , neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington , no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.

“‘So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.’

RELATED: Former FBI Agent Involved in Trump/Russia Probe Indicted for… Working for Russia

“I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

“‘Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.’

“He laughingly replied: ‘Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.’

“‘If I don’t,’ said I, ‘I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.’

“‘No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.’

“‘Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-by. I must know your name.’

“‘My name is Bunce.’

“‘Not Horatio Bunce?’


“‘Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.’

RELATED: Yes, They’re Coming for Your Gas Stoves – and They’ve Already Started

“It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

“At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had every seen manifested before.

“Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

“I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him–no, that is not the word–I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

“But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted–at least, they all knew me.

“In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

“‘Fellow-citizens–I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.’

“I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

“‘And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

RELATED: Don’t Look Now, but Biden May End Up Being the Greatest President Ever

“‘It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.’

“He came upon the stand and said:

“‘Fellow-citizens–It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.’

“He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

“I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

“Now, sir,” concluded Crockett, “you know why I made that speech yesterday.

“There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week’s pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men–men who think nothing of spending a week’s pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased–a debt which could not be paid by money–and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighted against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it.”

Holders of political office are but reflections of the dominant leadership–good or bad–among the electorate.

Horatio Bunce is a striking example of responsible citizenship. Were his kind to multiply, we would see many new faces in public office; or, as in the case of Davy Crockett, a new Crockett.

For either the new faces or the new Crocketts, we must look to the Horatio in ourselves!

This article originally appeared on and is published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,’//’); fbq(‘init’, ‘643288035726492’); fbq(‘track’, “PageView”);

Source link

Continue Reading


FBI Searching Biden’s Rehoboth Beach Home in Classified Documents Scandal



The FBI is searching Joe Biden’s Rehoboth Beach, Delaware home Wednesday morning for more classified documents according to a statement by Biden’s private attorney Bob Bauer.

Screen image via Fox News Digital.

Bauer released the statement in response to the search being leaked to CBS News, which first broke the news Wednesday. CBS was first to break the Biden classified documents scandal last month with a report on classified documents being found by Biden’s private attorneys in a search of his office at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, D.C. on November 2nd. CBS reported Tuesday the FBI searched the Penn Biden Center in mid-November.

The Biden administration, the Justice Department and Biden’s private attorneys have schemed to keep the searches and discoveries secret.

CBS News reporter Arden Farhi posted to Twitter, “BREAKING: Two sources familiar with the event tell CBS News FBI personnel are at President Biden’s Rehoboth home. One source familiar with the event tell CBS News the search is in relation to the classified documents investigation…A third source familiar with the investigation tells CBS News the search was planned with Biden’s attorneys and consensual. No warrant was sought for this search.”

TRENDING: Hunter Biden’s Metabiota Labs Received Tens of Millions of Dollars in DOD Contracts – Experimented with Bat Viruses in at least One Biolab

Bauer’s statement:

// initializing facebook
window.fbAsyncInit = function() {
appId : “”,
cookie : true, // enable cookies to allow the server to access
// the session
xfbml : true, // parse social plugins on this page
version : “”

// Load the SDK asynchronously
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); = id;
js.src = ”
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, “script”, “facebook-jssdk”));

Source link

Continue Reading


Blue Cities, States Using ‘State of Emergency’ to Attack Second Amendment



By Tom Gantert (The Center Square)

Government officials across the country are looking at gun violence state of emergencies as a way to address crime within their cities.

In Philadelphia, candidates for mayor held a debate Jan. 19 focused solely on gun violence.

“On my very first day, I am enacting a state of emergency on gun violence,” Helen Gym, a Democratic mayoral candidate, said during the debate recorded by WPVI.

RELATED: Biden Repeats Bizarre Challenge to Legal Gun Owners: You Need an F-15 to Take on the Government

Declaring a state of emergency grants additional powers to government and also makes them eligible for more government financial assistance, according to the executive orders put into place in numerous cities.

New York became the first state to declare an emergency due to gun violence in July 2021. It has extended that emergency until Feb. 15.

Rochester, N.Y., originally declared a gun violence state of emergency in July 2021 and extended its emergency for 30 days on Jan. 17.

In Rochester, the emergency order allows the police to shut down businesses that are determined to be nuisances. In December, the city filed a lawsuit against the firearm industry “for their role in fueling the gun violence crisis” in Rochester, according to a news release.

The city of Flint, Mi. declared a gun violence state of emergency in July 2021. The city said that emergency is still in place.

RELATED: Left Pushing to Use Banks, Credit Card Companies as Work-Around for Gun Control

The city of Portland, Ore. implemented a gun violence state of emergency in July 2021. The mayor’s office confirmed that emergency has been extended through February.

The city of Blakely, Ga., declared a local emergency due to gun violence in July 2022. The city stated the order was no longer in effect. While the emergency was in effect, the city was able to implement a midnight curfew and cease the sale of alcohol after 11 p.m.

And there have been calls by activists for their government to follow suit and implement gun violence emergencies.

The Oaklandside reported in June 2021 that activists chanted “state of emergency!” in an attempt to get Alameda County in California to declare a gun violence state of emergency.

In October 2022, California Congresswoman Barbara Lee and U.S. Senator Alex Padilla of California wrote a letter asking U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra to declare a national emergency due to gun violence.

RELATED: Minority Communities Object to Illinois’ Proposed Gun Ban Penalties

“Gun violence is currently the leading cause of premature death in the United States,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter, according to a news release. “The Public Health Emergency Declaration on Gun Violence will fundamentally reframe how people perceive gun violence prevention efforts and recommit this nation to ending gun violence. When faced with a national public health crisis, the federal government marshals its resources to protect Americans, and gun violence should not be an exception.”

The National Rifle Association said emergency orders aren’t the solution to the problems of shootings in cities like Philadelphia.

“There’s no gun violence or gun crimes without violent criminals,” Lars Dalseide, spokesman for the NRA, said in an email to The Center Square. “Arresting, prosecuting and punishing violent criminals who commit these heinous crimes is the solitary thing that will address this sad epidemic of violence in Philadelphia.”

Everytown For Gun Safety did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Syndicated with permission from The Center Square.

!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,’//’); fbq(‘init’, ‘643288035726492’); fbq(‘track’, “PageView”);

Source link

Continue Reading


%d bloggers like this: