The David Knight Show - INTERVIEW: Gun Control via Banks & Corporations

Episode Date: October 25, 2022

Guy A. Relford, attorney and radio host of "The Gun Guy", on the new tactics of gun control and how to defeat themFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-show Or you can send a donation throughZelle: @[e-mail] App at:  $davidknightshowBTC to:  bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Mail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

At LiveScoreBet, we love Cheltenham just as much as we love football. The excitement, the roar and the chance to reward you. That's why every day of the festival, we're giving new members money back as a free sports bet up to €10 if your horse loses on a selected race. That's how we celebrate the biggest week in racing. Cheltenham with LiveScoreBet. This is total betting. Sign up by 2pm 14th of March. Bet within 48 hours of race.

Main market excluding specials and place bets. Terms apply. Bet responsibly. 18 plus gamblingcare.ie Looking for reliable IT solutions for your business? At Innovate, we are the IT solutions people for businesses across Ireland. From network security to cloud productivity, we handle it all. Installing, managing, supporting and reporting on your entire IT and telecoms environment so you can focus on what really matters. Growing your business. Whether it's communications or security, Innovate has you covered.

Visit Innovate today. Innovate. The IT solutions people. All right. And joining us now is Guy Relford with the law offices of Guy Relford in Carmel, Indiana. And he also has a local radio show there. And one of his most recent shows, he was talking about the new moves by, and this is actually being driven out of New York, I believe, Guy, where they have demanded these codes so they can see what people are buying, that they're buying from gun shops and essentially track any kind of ammunition or gun purchases. But this is part of a bigger agenda to try to identify anything that they want to control. And of course, controlling speech and controlling guns is right there at the top of this. So joining us now is Guy Relford.

Thank you so much for joining us. It's my pleasure, David. It's a pleasure to be here. Well, thank you. Yeah, let's talk a little bit about that. What have you seen in terms of these kind of financial controls? Because that's one aspect of it. And it was the first one that was done back under the Obama administration.

They started talking about operation choke point where they're going to shut down the ability to access things financially. I've been shut down from PayPal because I talk about the vaccines and I talk about other things that don't like me to talk about, like gun freedom. So, you know, this kind of financial control is now spreading and metastasizing in a very real way, isn't it? Well, it really is. And as you mentioned, Operation Chokepoint was a very defined, very deliberate effort to go after the Second Amendment by attacking Second Amendment related businesses. And the whole idea is if we can put the gun industry out of business, we can put all the gun stores out of business um then we can essentially uh do what we haven't been able to do in the legislatures um which is to eradicate second amendment rights in america i mean that's

what they're clearly attempting to do and and they don't apologize for that and they're very specific about it but it's really started with going to financial institutions as you mentioned david um and saying you know you just shouldn't do business uh with any business that's associated with with selling guns or even get this i'm also in addition to being an attorney i'm a certified firearms instructor and i own a firearms training business i wrote gun safety for dummies several years ago i've had credit card companies and financial institutions say they will not process payments for my students to come take gun safety classes. Consider that. People who just want to be safe and responsible and law-abiding citizens. I teach a class on gun laws so that

people can stay on the right side of the law if they're going to be gun owners. And there are financial institutions out there that will not do business with me, just as you mentioned PayPal, not wanting to do business with you. I was turned down. There was a credit card processing company called Square. And they said, oh, no, you teach gun classes. We want nothing to do with your business. I've had fellow instructors.

One is a police officer with no criminal history whatsoever. He got a letter in the mail, a certified letter in the mail from his bank enclosing two certified checks saying, we've shut down your accounts, your business account, your personal account. Here are certified checks for the balances in each of those two accounts. We no longer choose to do business with you. And he was completely baffled. He thought perhaps his identity had been stolen or something. And he called them. Eventually, he got to the bottom of it, which is the financial institution just chooses not to do business with him as a finance as a firearms instructor so that's where it started but now we've gotten even more specific by going um to the international association that deals with credit card processing and these credit

card codes and and they've they've talked them that organization into creating a new credit card code that the credit card company will see anytime anybody uses a credit card for any purchase. This could be to buy a T-shirt, a box of ammo, whatever it might be, a training class. But if they use that credit card or debit card in a gun store, that credit card company is now notified. And you have to wonder, what is the purpose of that? And I've got some definite theories on that. Well, I do too. And I think that's why, you's why when you look at the Second Amendment and you look at the First Amendment, those are the canaries in the coal mine. And we know that what they want to do

is control everything that we do. They want to use the financial system as a way to track everything that we do with the central bank digital currencies to give us all a de facto global ID, but to also prohibit what kind of food we eat and how much we travel and what our lifestyle is. It's going to extend out to all these things. Right now, they're focusing just on free speech and on the Second Amendment. And that's one of the reasons why I talk so much about the Second Amendment is because these two areas are perceived by them to be a threat to their power, the First Amendment and the Second Amendment. And so they focus on them first and foremost,

and they try to get everybody scared of these things, saying speech is dangerous and firearms are dangerous and all the rest of this stuff, so they can justify coming after them. But once they come after them, they're going to go for everything else, and they've already made it clear. They're moving their agenda so quickly that it makes it easier for us. We don't have to, you know, there isn't a question that we are theorizing about a conspiracy. The conspiracy is in plain sight and we know exactly where they've laid out their roadmap and publicly talked about it. So we know exactly where this is headed, don't we?

You're exactly right. They're not subtle about it. So we know exactly where this is headed, don't we? You're exactly right. They're not subtle about it. You know, as my grandfather used to say, it doesn't take a gypsy to read those tea leaves. And, you know, we see what's going on. You know, on this credit card coding business, a lot of people have come out and they said, well, this is a backdoor way of creating a new database or registry of gun owners. So they're going to put, you know, they're going to put you into the database and track and track your purchases. I think that could very well be an intent of the system,

but the breakdown on that is that the credit card company isn't told what you bought. They've never just told an amount and that you used your credit card at a, at a, at a gun store. And so a database of guns, it doesn't really come out of this they said well we need to track suspicious purchases what's a suspicious purchase if if i go in and buy a new

very nice expensive rifle uh and i spend three thousand dollars on my rifle at a gun store great the credit card company's told i spent three thousand dollars at a particular gun store but they don't know whether that's three thousand dollars of twenty dollar boxes of ammo or three thousand dollars in t-shirts or three thousand dollars of what yeah so so it the the justification for it in terms of tracking suspicious purchases so as to cut down on mass shootings that's a ostensible reason behind this makes no sense because how do you identify what's suspicious when all you see is a dollar amount and the fact that it was made at a gun store i really think david that's why i think you were wise to mention operation choke point at the very beginning of this discussion i think it goes right back to trying to put gun related businesses out of business because at the end of the day

if that credit card company sees oh look here's a purchase from a gun store what do they have the option of doing decline that's right just decline yeah they want to end they want to end private ownership of guns just like they want to end private ownership of cars but you know right now they're saying well the guns are dangerous we've got to get rid of them because of blah blah you know whatever reason but once that what they're doing is they're also setting up this this control mechanism and if they can come in and say, well, we saw that somebody was, they want to be able to control what you buy, uh, how much of it you buy, uh, who you buy it from and that type of thing. So if they can set up this control mechanism and say, yeah,

but we're just doing this because guns are dangerous. Then as soon as they've got that up and working, one day you're going to wake up and find out that they're tracking the meat that you buy. And, you know, that is going to be extendable to every aspect of your life, and they're already talking about how they want to do that. So, you know, when we look at this, there is definitely a prohibition for guns aspect to it, and definitely a prohibition of speech, but it is so much broader than that, isn't it? And it really comes back to how they're using corporations to do things that they are prohibited from doing by the First Amendment, by the Second Amendment. They're using corporations to censor

people. They're using corporations to destroy businesses. Talk a little bit about that and where you see that line drawn, because that's something that's kind of controversial even amongst people who are supporters of freedom. Where do you see that line drawn? Because, you know, that's something that's kind of controversial, even amongst people who are supporters of freedom. Where do you see that line being drawn between what corporations are allowed to do on behalf of government, even if they don't make that connection there? Well, it's really, I think, an interesting plan on their part and it puts conservatives, in particular people like me who are hands-off conservatives, who I don't want the government in regulating private industry. I want the government to leave private industry the hell alone. However, when private industry starts operating as a branch of the government, where you have the credit card industry decide that it's now

associated itself with a government push to eradicate Second Amendment rights. That suddenly puts me as a conservative in a very tough spot, doesn't it? Because I want to say, wait a minute, the credit card companies shouldn't be allowed to have these policies that jeopardize my constitutional freedoms at the same time they're private organizations. So it puts me in a catch-22. Am I now going to advocate for the government to go in and restrict what these credit card companies can and cannot do? Am I going to push for government control of private industries? That's not in my DNA. So I think it's nefarious, but to some degree, you have to give credit where credit is due. It's somewhat intelligent because it puts the hands off conservatives like me in a very tough spot because they'll say, gosh, they're it's like twitter's a private entity they can you know they can sanction anyone they

can censor anyone they want to facebook's a private entity but then we get it puts us in this position of starting to say well when private entities are no longer being used as a private entity but as a branch of an overreaching government then constitutional freedoms then apply to that situation because they are by extension operating as the government in order to eradicate constitutional rights. But that's an argument you don't see out there very often. And that's something we're going to have to come to grips with because the more big industry and big tech aligns itself with those who would eradicate our constitutional freedoms, the less I think they should be treated like private companies and private

organizations and more like an extension of an overreaching government. I agree. We saw this with the censorship by, you know, the, the internet companies and social media companies and everybody saying, well, they can do whatever they want.

And at the same time you had Jack Dorsey and multiple multiple hearings before Congress saying we are the digital public square. And, you know, we've had situations where we've said you're not going to exclude somebody even as a private company. You're not going to exclude somebody. You're not going to kick black people out of the restaurant. You're not going to put them in the back of the bus, refuse service to somebody like that. And so we said there's certain things that you can't do because you are in the public arena and because you really don't have, and this is where I think the line is drawn. I'd like to know what you think about this guy. I've talked about it from the standpoint that human institutions, especially corporations that are created by given government

privileges, they have privileges and they're created by humans they're created by institutions and so they don't have rights like human beings do human beings are given rights by our Creator as the Declaration of Independence says so that's something that's different these other people who are in business you know when you open up a business you get what a privileged license the government has given you a privilege to operate that whether, when you open up a business, you get what? A privilege license. The government has given you a privilege to operate that. Whether you're operating it as a corporation or you're operating it as an individual, they recognize that they are authorizing you to do something.

That comes with some requirements in the same way that when we did federal deposit insurance, it came with requirements that they couldn't engage in speculative activity. So if they've got this business privilege license, then there are certain restrictions about what they can't do to actual people. I think that's one of the ways that we need to understand that. But look at the way that this is spread. First, it was Operation Chokepoint. That went away. Then they went after speech and said, well, Twitter is just like a person. And so they get to decide who they shut out of the public square. Then it moves back to guns. And then down the road very soon and coming at us very quickly is ESG, where they say, well, we don't, you know, corporations don't really even have to provide value to their stockholders anymore. They just need to do what the government says to do, you know, ESG, environmental and social goals of the government, you know, which is

where they're headed. So I think there has to be some kind of a, we have to pull back, I think, as conservatives and people who support liberty and free market, we have to also understand the distinction between these people who are acting as agents of the government and these corporations that are not the same as human beings, are they? activity, we handle it all. Installing, managing, supporting, and reporting on your entire IT and telecoms environment so you can focus on what really matters, growing your business. Whether it's communications or security, Innovate has you covered. Visit Innovate today. Innovate, the IT solutions people. What do you think? Yeah, I know. It really, I think, is a fascinating discussion because, like I said, it puts people, you know, who are normally hands off.

And as I do, I mean, my foundational position, David, is that more government control of anything is always bad and less government control of anything is always good. And that's just where I start. Right. And so whenever I hear myself advocating for more government control of anything you know that that immediately sets off little triggers um i think i think i think the preference ought to be and and where the fight ought to be first is always in the marketplace and and let let let capitalism let market demand let the consumer dissuade these people from from from having these people meaning these corporations big tech um big companies people from having these people, meaning these corporations, big tech, big companies generally, from having policies that we as consumers disapprove of. If Twitter lost half their followers overnight because we just said, we don't choose to engage in this because

of the censorship anymore. If people stop using Bank of America or Citibank or whatever the other, and I'm not naming them individually, but just by way of example, if we stopped using particular credit cards, if I cancel all my credit cards from those companies that I see engaged in the businesses and the practices espoused by Operation Chokepoint and 50 million other people do exactly the same thing, can't we influence those policies? So I think a first priority ought to go to the marketplace and go to the consumer and say, you are going to make less money. And to a dramatic extent, if you engage in these practices, if that fails, because people just aren't willing to give up their credit card or people just aren't willing to give up, you know,

going on Twitter and Facebook. I mean, as much as I despise the practices of Facebook, I still have a Facebook account. So I'm guilty in that respect myself, if we're not successful there, I think we need to get creative and go, you know, and look at some of the options you're talking about, but man, it's tough for me to get off my foundational position of more government control of anything is always bad. That's a, that's a, that's a tough, um, uh, issue for me to get past. I agree. Yeah. It's not necessarily telling them what they can do, but it's telling them what they can't do.

And the way I look at it is you've got, we don't really have a free market anymore. The government has allowed these corporations to establish, if not a monopoly, an oligarchy. If you look at the social media companies, if you look at the banks, we have a few banks that are too big to fail. All these banks are getting together to push this ESG stuff. And we've seen in the last couple of years, we've seen corporations come out in open defiance and contempt and hatred of their customer base, you know, pushing some of this CRT stuff to a customer base. Look at what NASCAR has done, what Coca-Cola has done. You look at this and say, what are they doing? That doesn't make any sense from a business standpoint, unless you look at this and say, what are they doing? That doesn't make any sense from a business standpoint,

unless you look at it and you say, well, I think we've moved beyond the point where it's a free market and they have to care about what the consumers want. They're only pleased with one customer. They've got one customer, and that's government. And if they get the government happy with what they're doing, then they're going to be fine. But they can get to the point where they have such contempt for the consumers

because it isn't really a market situation anymore. So I think, you know, it is important for us to get back to the foundations of, you know, what our country is really about with the Declaration of Independence. And we need to go back and start to, I think, maybe clarify what we understand by rights and privileges and other things like that. I've got a comment here from a listener in Australia. Thank you for the tip, Harps. He says, don't let them start a firearms registry. Too many times here in Australia, the info gets leaked and farmers and other firearm owners' houses get robbed.

And that's the key thing that everybody should be concerned about. Because anytime somebody is collecting any kind of information, there's a lot of different ways that that information can be gleaned and mined and cross-referenced, isn't it, Guy? No doubt. No doubt. One point on our discussion on looking into this discrimination against lawful firearms-related or Second Amendment-related is i i wouldn't have advocated strongly for a bill that we've introduced in indiana uh two years in a row now we haven't gotten it out of committee yet but we're not we're not giving up um and that is when when talking about big tech or big companies just you know discriminating as they do against lawful second amendment related, I think the government can provide a series of carrots or sticks.

And by that, I mean, by way of example, the bill we offered said, if you're a financial institution and you discriminate against a firearms related industry, whether it's a firearms instructor or a gun shop or whoever it is, that's fine. You can have whatever practices you want. However, you are now off the list of companies that are eligible to this to do business with the state of indiana in other words you want your credit card to be used when people you know renew their license plates at the bureau of motor vehicles uh or or you know whatever governmental entity might be involved then don't engage in

these practices but we're not telling you what to do you you have whatever practices you'd like but we will not do business with you as the indiana state government i love that concept because that that's allowing them to have whatever policies they'd like but it provides a big stick um as opposed to a carrot and and and let's let free market in that aspect with the state of indiana being a big consumer of these same services from these same companies influence them in that way. And I think we can look at carrots and sticks and having a real influence. And that's why I helped develop that bill and fought very hard for it in the legislature this year. And I think we're having a real shot at getting it done this year. That's good. I think that's a good approach. And in a sense, you could even look at it, you know, it's not only just a carrot and a stick, but you could look at it as, hey, we're going to remove some of your privileges.

You know, you've got access to this database here. Well, you know it's not only just a carrot and a stick but you could look at it as hey we're going to remove some of your privileges you know you got access to this database here well you know that's a privilege that we're going to grant you but you know if you're going to engage in that kind of behavior we're not going to do it you know they're coming at this indirectly through the banks but you know guy there's been a lot of action directly by the atf even people inside the atf have talked about how the Biden administration is pulling people's federal firearm licenses over minor paperwork issues. And in the past, it'd just be a fine. So we know that this is an agenda. Talk a little bit about that. And what do you see there happening in Indiana? Have you seen this happening there? Oh, absolutely. See,

I mean, the nature of my practice, my law practice is only second amendment related. That's all I do um and so when things like that start happening my phone rings a lot and let me tell you on that exact issue david it's been ringing a lot because i'll give you a good example a gun store here locally i'm in a suburb of indianapolis my radio shows out of indianapolis but i got a call from a gentleman who's having issues with the atf on renewing his license and his local atf guy atf yeah think of atf as kind of being divided into two big groups when it comes to gun stores one is industry operations they go in and they they help them with their paperwork and they make

sure their inventories are straight and you know and and that that just what it sounds like they're they're helping the that gun store stay on the right side of the law and then and then are the door kickers, right? They're the guys who carry guns. And they're the guys who show up with an armored vest and kick doors in and do the things that ATF does. In terms of the industry operations, folks, and this gun store, this client of mine has had the same guy that they've worked with since they opened. So for years, he's been doing it for 25 years for ATF. He came in and he said said let me tell you why i don't think i can do this any longer he said under the biden administration he said my job has changed my job historically was always to come in and help you with your paperwork help you make sure your

records are straight help you make sure you're submitting everything you need to submit timely helping you maintain your records in a searchable database as you're required to do or searchable form he said my job was to keep you on the right side of the law to keep you in business he goes since biden's been in office from my superiors my job description has fundamentally changed my job now is to find an excuse to put you out of business any excuse a different gun store something I was working on this morning before having the privilege of coming on your show. And ATF found the fact that the owner of a gun store had an arrest that did not even result in a conviction. It was an arrest from 1982. I kid you not.

40 years ago for shoplifting. Shoplifting as a misdemeanor from 40 years, literally 40 years ago, they came and they said, we will not renew your firearms license because we see this case was dismissed by something we call judgment withheld. That was a teenager. A lot of times I'll just put judgment, meaning they let you off. Essentially the case is over for all intents and purposes. They said, well, since it's judgment withheld, that's still an open case. They could amend the charges to be a felony, which means you wouldn't be eligible to have a gun store. So we're not going to renew your license from a 40 year old shoplifting charge.

They're going to put this guy out of business. Well, he called me and let me just tell you, they are not going to put him out of business. I'm going to hang some scalps before that's over because this is absolutely ridiculous. But it's a perfect example of how the ATF now is their job is to put you out of business. So if we can use a radicalized government agency like ATF and then get the financial institutions on top, all gang up on a given industry, including disallowing them from even using credit cards, I think that's the ultimate objective of this new coding system. They'll just start denying it charges. And now we we're going to so-called cashless society,

right? What's the likelihood of staying in business if you can't use, if you can't take credit cards at your business, it's designed to come out of business. And if you and I can't go buy a gun somewhere, that's a great way to eradicate the second amendment. You know, it's kind of interesting as we see this happening, this ought to be a wake-up call to all of us to start thinking more about how we're going to operate in a parallel society. Because, I mean, the ultimate approach that they want is to control everything that we buy. And when we can buy it, how much we can buy it, who we can buy it from, that type of thing. We know that is their plan. And so if we can't stop them with elected people, because we've got a lot of elected people who don't seem to be aware or care, or maybe they're

on board with that. I don't really see a whole lot of awareness or talk about that on the Republican side about how are we going to stop this CBDC stuff. I mean, that is a full on agenda from Biden. He's got every branch of government operating on that. So that's coming. But right now, you know, it's affecting just the gun stores and stuff. And so, you know, we need to start thinking about how we're going to start operating outside of the system somehow, you know, operating simply on cash or something. Or, you know, if they take away the cash, you know, how we operate with gold and silver or something like that. It is kind of, as I've seen them lock down the schools, that's been something that has

been a boon to homeschooling, people getting a chance to see what the schools are really about and kind of moving them into another. So we could look at this as kind of an educational opportunity. We hope that we don't have to do that. But I've got a comment here from Greg. He says, I've got a friend that has a pawn shop and a gun shop for 25 years. Recently, they shut it down. The feds are scrutinizing every little aspect of the deal, trying to find some kind of a mistake, some kind of an infraction. Then the financial stuff started, PayPal shutdowns, credit card stuff. He finally just said, the heck with it. That's exactly what they're trying to do. They're trying to pressure people out, but it's not going to stop at the guns right now.

It's at the guns and they do want to, you know, ban firearms, but they want to ban everything in our life. So they have absolute total control. Have you seen, go ahead. I'm sorry.

I was just going to agree with you and say that, uh, but is that something I've been saying for years and years and years on my radio show and otherwise is that gun control is not even about guns. It's about control. Yes, that's right. That that's right that's why they're they're exercising it right now they say it's all about the guns but no it's about people control when we're talking about what they're doing with the the gun stores there's also something else that we've been seeing happening and that is in-person visits to people who have had multiple purchases.

And I've played this several times where you get a knock on the door and it's like, you just recently bought four firearms. Show me your firearms. Have you had any clients that have had a situation like that? Looking for reliable IT solutions for your business? At Innovate, we are the IT solutions people for businesses across Ireland. From network security to cloud productivity, we handle it all. Installing, managing, supporting, and reporting on your entire IT and telecoms environment

so you can focus on what really matters, growing your business. Whether it's communications or security, Innovate has you covered. Visit Innovate today. Innovate, the IT Solutions People. Yes, and there's a very simple response which is show me your warrant no warrant get off my property come back with a warrant that's right and because there's absolutely nothing about buying more than one gun at one time that gives any authority probable cause either for a search or for an arrest um so there's you know it's gonna

be hard pressed to find a judge to sign off on a warrant simply based on uh a multiple firearm purchase so it's you have a warrant no get out and get the hell off my property end of story because you know the more the more people say well i don't have anything to hide and well you know i i lawfully bought these guns and i still have both of them and so why shouldn't i cooperate It's because they're asking you to relinquish your constitutional freedoms. Here, we're talking about the Fourth Amendment. You know, that is an unreasonable search and seizure. That's exactly what the founders did not want happening.

They did not want, you know, that government agent showing up and knocking on your door saying, you need to justify to me your decision to exercise a constitutionally protected freedom. That's not okay. And we shouldn't concede that and we shouldn't give up that fight. And yes, I've seen that happen. And the other thing that is going to exacerbate that dramatically, David, and the FBI is doing this under the auspices of this new so-called Safer Communities Act that was just passed that is gun control. There's no question about it. But it expanded background checks for juveniles. And we're going to now look at juvenile records to see, well, if they have a violent crime when they were a juvenile, some violent crimes can

now cause you to not be able to buy a gun as an adult. So we're going to look at some increased juvenile records. And they've looked at that and they said they said well we've expanded background checks so what we now need even though there's no real connection it's just an excuse is they're now telling gun stores that if the gun store gets either a delay or a deny on a gun purchase in other words let's back up the way that system works I go in to buy a gun then I fill out what's called a 4473 form. That's got my identifying information. It also has the information on the gun itself that I'm buying. All the gun store then sends to the FBI so that there's a background check under what we call the National Institute of Criminal Background Check System.

They just send my identifying information, my name, my social security number if I gave it to them, my date of birth, where I was born, that type of thing. They use my identifying information to do my date of birth that where i was born that type thing they use my identifying information to do my background check now what the what fbi is telling gun stores is well we'll back up one more time in response to that background check the gun store receives one of three responses proceed which means sell them the gun delay which means there's something here we need to take a more look a longer look at so don't give them the gun now.

We'll tell you sometime within the next few days, whether you can give them the gun or deny, which is this guy can't buy a gun. If a person now gets either a delay, which could mean simply that they're busy at the FBI. I mean, you'll go try to buy a gun on Black Friday. You'll probably get delayed. So, I mean, it's a volume can cause delays, but anytime anybody gets a delay or a deny, the gun store is being told they have to, at that point, send the FBI, the person's street address, their home street address so that the FBI knows exactly where that person

lives and why do you suppose they want that information? Yeah, that's right. Yeah. My son, every time he goes to buy a gun, he gets a delay. He says, that's kind of suspicious about that. I mean, it could be that he, the time of year that he's buying, as you pointed out, but again, there, there's nothing, uh, nothing criminal about that. Uh, and, and, you know, when you were talking about the appropriate response to somebody being at the door, I remember the very first one of these that i saw uh the guy was very you know he he had it all recorded on a uh door camera you know that was there and and when he uh put it back up he says

i got really angry with myself that i complied but he said the reason i did it was because you know there's three guys there in uniform it's kind of intimidating all the neighbors are looking out like what's going on here this guy's getting you, raided by the police or whatever. And he just, you know, I've got nothing to hide type of attitude and the intimidation that was involved in all of that. And he got really angry with himself that he did comply because as you pointed out, that is allowing them to do searches without warrants and other things. And it's a very dangerous precedent that's being set there. But I've seen that type of thing, Guy, when I've reported people who have been wrongfully accused of something with CPS.

And one of the things that the advocates for parents will say is like, I know that when they come to you and there's an accusation, you want to show that, look, I've done nothing at all. I'm completely innocent. But that frequently becomes something that they use to attack you. And so, you know, the appropriate response, they're coming to your door, whether it's like, show me your guns or show me your kids or whatever.

It's like, get a warrant. I'll call my lawyer. And before we talk, people shy away from that because they think, well, that's like, it looks like I've got something to hide. No, we have to keep've got something to hide. No, we have to keep these people obedient to the law because the worst kind of criminal is a government criminal. When the government is acting criminal, acting outside the law, that is the most dangerous kind of criminal, isn't it? It is. And listen, I say often, and I couldn't agree with you more on this point, what I've said to people often is what we need to get our heads around is that innocent people have constitutional rights to do. And this

whole idea of, well, I have nothing to hide, so I'll just, you know, roll over on any government request to search my vehicle, search my home, you know, demand by ATF to show guns. No, as an innocent person, I also have constitutional freedoms. And our founders of this great country wanted us as innocent people to be as protected as people who did have something kind. In fact, perhaps even more, where probable cause a crime has occurred is an exception, right, to prohibition against a search or a seizure. So the idea that I don't have anything to hide, so I should willingly give up my constitutional freedoms. That's as repugnant to me as it could possibly be because the founders wanted me to have the same freedoms

and wanted me as an innocent person with nothing to hide, be able to stand on the Constitution and tell the government to go pound sand. I agree. And government, I'll even give you some inside baseball here. There's something that law enforcement i've seen this in traffic stops over and over i've seen it on personal visits when they come to someone's home law enforcement officers and i've seen this in some of the videos of atf showing up at people's houses after either a denial or a delay now or with a multiple gun purchase but they'll show up

and they'll use the phrase david i'm gonna need to they'll say i'm gonna need to search your vehicle all right yeah and it sounds like well you've they've got a right to search my vehicle so they're just telling me they're about to search my vehicle and then what do i say i'm gonna need to search your vehicle so i'm gonna need to see those two guns that sounds like he has the authority to demand that so i then say okay or you know a, you know, a traffic stop, you know, I'm going to need to serve. You know, I see a guy that your license plate says to a attorney, which it does. Right. So he says, well, that gives me a reason to believe there's a gun in your car.

So I'm going to need to search your vehicle to find that gun. Okay. I'm going to need to, if I say, oh, well, you're going to need to. So you're not asking my permission. You're just telling me what you're going to do anyway. And I say, okay. He gets me out of the vehicle. He searches my vehicle.

His police report will be written exactly like this, that consent to search the vehicle was requested from the individual. The individual then gave permission and gave consent to the search. You can always consent to any violation of your constitutional rights. As soon as I say, okay, to I'm going to need to, they will write it as I gave consent. That's a very important point. And I've had that be pulled. And I speak to law enforcement officers a lot on constitutional rights. And I'll say, I know what you guys do. You use that phrase essentially to trick people into giving consent when they're not really giving consent. They're just acknowledging something that you've said. And they all smile and wink and look at each other like that's exactly what we do. And look, I don't think law enforcement officers are necessarily out

there trying to frame innocent people necessarily. But I think an awful lot want to stretch what they're allowed to do under the Constitution as far as they possibly can. Maybe they justify that saying, well, they're trying to catch bad guys. but guess what? In the meantime, if you're violating my constitutional rights, that's not okay. So I'm going to need to, should they always be responded to as, if you're asking me for consent, sir, I do not give that consent. That's right. But first I'm going to need to see your search warrant. That's a better response. I wish I'd said that. That's exactly right. Yeah, I remember years ago, a really egregious case in New Jersey. A guy was moving and he had a concealed carry license and all this other kind of stuff. He was moving from one state to another state.

He stopped in New Jersey to visit relatives. He was late. They were concerned about him. So they called the police. The police pulled him over. They saw him and pulled him over. And then they said, I'm going to need to search your car. And he had in his trunk buried under clothes and all kinds of stuff that he was carrying locked in the trunk.

They found a gun and they came after him. They wound up putting him in jail, you know, because New Jersey rules and things. So, yeah, you don't need to show them anything. They need a search warrant. That's that's exactly. Yeah. New Jersey. I, my, the story that I always tell from New Jersey is absolutely true is a person

was flying from Minnesota to Pennsylvania and they had legally declared a firearm in their check bag because they could legally carry in Minnesota and they could legally carry it their destination in, uh, uh uh where they were flying to in Pennsylvania and so they declared their gun which is all according to TSA regulations and whatnot but because of weather they got diverted to Newark and so he had to land in Newark it was the last flight in there were no more flights going out so they said we're going to put you up at the airport hotel since we're putting you up at the hotel we're going to give you your your luggage back so you've got your toiletries and a change of clothes and whatnot guy spends the night in the airport hotel it goes back

to the ticket counter new jersey and says i need to declare the unloaded firearm in my check bag per tsa regulations there's cop standing right there who says i'm going to need to see your handgun license wow your new jersey handgun license. He goes, well, I don't have a New Jersey handgun license. Took him to jail. Wow. And he goes, I didn't want to come to New Jersey. Nobody wants to go to New Jersey. Nobody ever brought me to New Jersey.

I didn't want to come to New Jersey and they put him in jail. Wow. So, I mean, that, that's what we're faced with within some of these states. Wow. Well, we got an election coming up. I mean, that's what we're faced with in some of these states. Wow. Well, we've got an election coming up. I mean, what is on, is there anything concrete? You know, we've identified a lot of problems. Have you seen GOP politicians identifying these same problems or other things to roll

them back? What are your expectations? I mean, we're hoping that... Looking for reliable IT solutions for your business? At Innovate, we are the IT solutions people for businesses across Ireland. From network security to cloud productivity, we handle it all. Installing, managing, supporting, and reporting on your entire IT and telecoms environment so you can focus on what really matters, growing your business. Whether it's communications or security.

Innovate has you covered. Visit Innovate today. Innovate, the IT solutions people. That the House is going to turn, perhaps, and shut down some of these things. But, of course, the dangerous thing is that Biden is still going to be there. And even if you had, um, second amendment supporters, uh, you know, um, you know, you had GOP re who really supported the second amendment and they had a majority in both the house and the Senate. We've now established this idea that, um, the president can do gun

control by executive order that was set up by Trump. And now, uh, Biden has done that with the brace, you know, Trump did it with a bump stock, Biden did it with a brace. Now know, Trump did it with a bump stock. Biden did it with a brace. Now he's done it with, you know, something else and indicates that he plans on continuing to do that. I mean, where are we politically? How do you see this as somebody who focuses on this very closely?

I think that all our real advancement on Second Amendment rights, where we actually move the needle. So now half our states in the country have constitutional carry. So you don't have to go beg the permission from the government to exercise a right you already have, which is to bear arms or carry a firearm. To get Congress, if we, let's say we, if Republicans take a majority in the Senate and the House, as you said, you're not going to get anything past a Biden veto for two years. Unfortunately, where I think there's a huge failing in the National Republican Party is that even if we see, you know, a President DeSantis or Trump again in 2024, I don't think this Congress and Republicans in Congress, the majority of them, or at least enough of them, have a real will to advance our rights because they're so deathly afraid of being criticized for somehow enabling the next mass shooter, right? I agree.

They are so afraid of being connected to some act of violence out there, even though that act of violence is solely the responsibility of some lunatic, you know, who wants to go murder people and people simply blame the instrumentality are, are, are, are national politicians are so afraid of that connection that, uh, I don't have any real optimism in, in getting like something like national reciprocity, which just makes sense. If, if my driver's license is recognized in all 50 States, why shouldn't my, my, my carry license? Yeah. The carry license is harder to get than a driver's license for sure.

Exactly. In fact, and I got to tell you, the Obergefell decision on gay marriage, however anybody feels about gay marriage, take that issue off the table. The analysis of why every state, not only do states have to marry people of same sex, according to the Supreme Court in that decision, but why every state has to recognize those licenses of same-sex couples under 14th Amendment principles. The court's analysis is directly online. If you took marriage license out of those two paragraphs of the Supreme Court's opinion and put in carry license or license to carry handgun, it reads perfectly under the analysis that they laid out. I would like to litigate

that issue and win it, but failing that, there's no reason why my carry license shouldn't be recognized in all 50 states. That just makes sense. We've had bills pass in the House and not get through the Senate in the past or vice versa, depending on majorities. There's no reason that shouldn't happen. It should happen as soon as Republicans have control of the government again. Do I have any faith it will? No, because I think our GOP politicians at the national level just simply lack courage on the Second Amendment. Oh, I agree. Yeah, yeah.

Where is the bill to outlaw SUVs because of the Waukesha, you know, killer gun, you know, running people down at the Christmas parade, right? They didn't do that. They didn't blame that instrument of death. Of course, they do want to outlaw SUVs, but for different reasons. But let's not push that analogy too far because they just might take us up on that. But, you know, I think you were absolutely right when you said the good stuff is going to come at the local level. And I think that's even true, even when you look at Obergefell you know when they when um uh when you had Scalia

and Thomas especially Thomas talking about uh Roe v Wade he said look there's certain things that need to be decided at the state level and and even they recognized that the Supreme Court had overstepped its authority in terms of defining that but you know once they defined it you got a marriage license here you got a marriage license there you got a carry license there carry license there that's true. But I think the real power and what the conservative movement should really be doing is trying to do things at the state level and asserting the 10th Amendment to say we have these powers and this has not been delegated to the federal government. And so even if Biden does some kind of gun control by executive order, not just vetoing what the Republicans might do in the Congress, but if he proactively creates some new kind of gun control by an executive order, because that's what Lala Harris promised

to do that when she was running for president. She said, I'm going to give them 100 days, and if they don't do what I want, I'm going to do it by executive order because Trump had done that with bump stocks. And so, you know, he'd set the precedent. She was going to carry through that. The way you stop that is with the 10th amendment, isn't it? Yeah, it absolutely is. And I got to tell you, I mean, to, to get completely on a philosophical soapbox, um, I think the greatest travesty in, in the, the, the many years of this country has been what the Supreme court has allowed Congress to do under the Commerce Clause. The Commerce Clause simply allows Congress to regulate any damn thing it wants to.

If there's some remote theoretical hypothetical connection to interstate commerce, that's never what the founders intended in the Commerce Clause. And what they intended was the meaning and intent of the Tenth Amendment which is exactly as you laid out it's either expressly specifically yes now within within a constitutional delegation of authority to the federal government or they don't have that power i mean i i tell people and they look at me like i'm crazy i said do you know that there is no police power delegated to the federal government in the constitution that's right they look at me go how could that possibly be? I mean, we have more people running around with federal badges and guns than we have United States Marines, right?

FBI and ATF and postal inspectors that are armed. I mean, we have, we have, we have more people running around with federal badges than we have United States Marines. And there's no federal police power. The founders always intended the police power to reside in the States. And we have turned that on its head. And I think that's the greatest travesty. And that combined with the fact that we've allowed, through the executive branch, the creation of what is really a fourth branch of government, which is executive agencies. And we've given them legislative ability. We've given them judicial ability, which means they can interpret not only their own regulations that they pass, but their own delegation of power. They can be nice. I wish I could define my own delegation of authority from my wife gives me. Right. I know what you said, but I'm going to I'm going to define that however I want to. And then they can obviously execute, which is their only job is defined by the Constitution. So we've given all three constitutional powers, legislative, judicial and executive to this fourth

branch of government. And that's why you have a rogue ATF. That's why you have a rogue IRS. And I'm hopeful I have some vague hope, a glimmer of hope that this West Virginia v. EPA case that just came down this term under this Supreme Court, and I'm excited about this Supreme Court, it came down and they said, oh, hold on. There has to be an express delegation of authority by Congress to the administrative agency, to the executive agency. You can't just make it up as you go. And I read that and I said, oh, let's talk about ATF now because we got to rein those people in too. And that's just, you know, that's what my particular ox being gored.

But that gave me a glimmer of hope that this Supreme Court may start reining in on this absolutely unfettered delegation of authority to federal agencies because that just scares, not only as a Second Amendment advocate, but just someone who loves freedom and loves the country. That, I I think is our greatest threat right now. Oh, I absolutely agree. You and I are on the same page.

I have talked about that for the longest time, about how they basically become little governments each of them to themselves. They write the rules. They enforce the rules. Because they call it a rule, because they call it a civil rule, they say, well, it's not a law because it wasn't passed by your elected representatives. So you don't get any presumption of innocence. You don't get any protection against excessive fines. And we will determine what is there. You know, we've gotten into the situation guy. I always talk about, I say, we now not only have taxation without

representation, but we have regulation without representation because these people have done the Congress has really abdicated all this stuff remember when nancy pelosi said we have to pass it so we can find out what's in it and everybody said is she crazy what's the matter with her no that's the way the government works they pass these broad guidelines and then they turn it over to the bureaucracy and the bureaucracy fills in all the devilish details that's the way the thing she was actually being honest with people for once and by the way then the elected official has no accountability because when we don't like what the IRS does to us or the ATF does to us, if we don't like that, we go and we say, we don't like it. The government official says, well, that's the FBI or that's the ATF,

that's the IRS. I didn't do that. Don't vote me out of office. So it's a way to avoid any accountability for what our government is doing to us and and consider consider the the word you mentioned the declaration of independence and and and i always go back not you know the the the wording that even though biden can never remember it right but the the primary you know phrase that people talk about with you know the unalienable rights endowed by our creator when people people think about that what i think about I think about the governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, from the consent of the governed. I think about those words all the time, David, because when the IRS does something that causes

me real harm, I mean, it takes money out of my pocket, could potentially put me in jail, right? How do I withhold my consent? My elected official, I can say, well, I don't like that vote on that bill, or I don't like that bill you introduced, or I don't like the fact that you refused to support my billing in that committee hearing that I watched. So I'm going to withhold my consent from you in the next election. And that's what the founders had in mind. How do I do that with these administrative agencies? How is an administrative agency accountable to the government such that we're either giving or withholding the consent of the government? That's our system of government.

And this fourth branch of government through executive agencies has eradicated. People talk about the founders spinning in their graves. I think this would be the number one thing that would cause them torment. No doubt. Oh, yeah. They put their rules through a comment period. And you can comment if you know about it. And they can look at it and say, yeah, I don't care.

Just pitch it over their shoulder. You know, that's, I guess, their little ritual to pretend that they're somehow, you know, under us. But that's a key thing. You know, when you talk about how many people in all these different federal bureaucracies that are armed, as the report came out, you know, more than we have armed Marines. And we have all these different armed bureaucracies. And there's not really anything that Congress is doing to keep them under control. For years, you had Rand Paul introducing the REINS Act. He did it on a regular basis when he first became senator.

And there would be people in the house that would introduce the same thing but they could never get uh any anybody to really help them much i mean there just really wasn't a consensus uh for doing anything about it because they can always come in and first of all they as you point out they denied they've got any responsibility for it but if it gets really bad they can come in and pretend they're going to protect you from this like some kind of a knight on a white horse right uh oh i saw how the bureaucracy denied that they've got any responsibility for it. But if it gets really bad, they can come in and pretend they're going to protect you from this, like some kind of a knight on a white horse, right? Uh, oh, I saw how the bureaucracy got after you. Well, we're going to fix that.

You know, when they shouldn't have never, they should never have let in the bureaucracy get that far out of hand. Exactly. And, and that's why, again, this, this EPA v West Virginia case, um, by this Supreme court does give me that little glimmer of hope because this is where the EPA was just making up, I think it was clean air. I always get clean air and clear water turned around, but they just made up, I believe it was a clean air regulation within EPA such that they could put companies out of business with this regulation. And they said, well, we're the EPA. That's what we do. And we're going to pass this regulation. We're going to enforce this regulation. And this

Supreme Court said, hold on. We can't find an express specific delegation of authority from Congress to you to do that. That thing right there, that's not okay. That's inconsistent with the 10th Amendment. That's inconsistent with the limitation on express delegation of power to the executive branch. And while Congress can delegate its legislative authority, and as you and I have been discussing, does far too often, we're going to make them expressly and specifically do that before we let a regulatory agency run wild. And that's music to my ears, even though I have no direct involvement in EPA regulations. And as far as my law practice goes, that extends to all walks of life for Americans, if we can start reining that in. Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah. We saw a lot of that during this pandemic stuff and the CDC putting on moratorium on evictions and all that kind of stuff. Grabbing power, they'll take it whenever they can get it, anywhere they can. It's great talking to you, Guy. And tell people, you've got the Gun Guy podcast right uh is that uh anywhere you find podcast where can people find you yeah it's out there it's on itunes it's on omni it's i think it's about anywhere you find podcasts what that is is i have a live radio show in indianapolis david on saturday afternoon people can listen to live at wibcc.com. Each show we post as a podcast

out various places. It's a live radio show, but people can find that podcast on iTunes or Omni or any of the other platforms. That's great. Is your radio program out on the internet so people can join it and make comments online? Yeah, wibc.com.

Absolutely. Well, it's great talking to you. Thank you for what you're doing. It is really the tip of the spear in terms of freedom. They're setting up the examples coming through Second Amendment, coming through the First Amendment, so it's very important what you're doing. Thank you so much, Guy. Gun Guy.

Thank you. It's an honor to be here. Thank you. The Gun Guy Show. Thank you very much, Guy. Appreciate that. In the little bit of time that we got left i would just want to talk about this particular uh essay from dr james alexander said there is no coherent conservative

doctrine so arguing about what conservative how conservative leadership candidates are is pointless this is coming out of the uk and as this guy is talking about the history of conservatism in the uk he says, so what is it? He said, there is a phenomenon which we'll call X, and this X is the resistance of society to taxation and to coercion. So is that what conservatism is? He goes back and he looks at the history of conservatism. He says, you know, what conservatism has come to mean, really, he said in 1826, you had John Cam Hobhouse joked about the existence of his majesty's opposition standing

against his majesty's government. But people immediately recognized the truth of that system. Government and opposition were no longer the government, the court within, and then the country that was from the outside. It wasn't this juxtaposition. Both of them were within the same system. And furthermore, he said, originally, conservatism was compromised, even corrupt. He said men who had opposed the French Revolution now accepted these things like the Reform Act. They'd been convinced not by truth, but by time. And conservatism became a word for the attempt to recognize the political significance of time.

I think that's a very important insight because I've talked about it for the longest time. The problem with conservatism, and I say it often, I say, well, you know, the Democrats have become the communists of my youth and the Republicans have become the Democrats of my youth. We see this continual movement, this ratcheting, if you will. The conservatives will resist what the left has put in until enough time passes. And then they will never go back to the previous state. They try to always conserve the status quo. And so they are convinced not by truth, but by time. And we need to get past that kind of thinking. Well, that's it for the program today.

Thank you for joining us. The Common man. They created common core to dumb down our children. They created common past to track and control us. Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing. And the communist future. They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.

That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us. It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidknightshow.com. Thank you for listening. Thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing.

If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. TheDavidKnightShow.com Thank you.