Did the Democrats accidentally reveal their #guncontrol agenda? — Updated

**Posted by Phineas

Interesting. Via Bryan Preston, a New York assemblyman posted a wish-list of things they wanted to include in the worse than useless gun control bill rammed through last week. Is this also the national Democrats’ goal?

1. Confiscation of “assault weapons”
2. Confiscation of ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder’s information to be replaced (1) to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as “assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons

Meanwhile, the New York Constitution specifies the following oath in article 13, section 1:

Members of the legislature, and all officers, executive and judicial, except such inferior officers as shall be by law exempted, shall, before they enter on the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of ……, according to the best of my ability;”

Last I checked, the US Constitution included an amendment regarding the right to keep and bear arms, and it seems to me the law-abiding gun owners of New York have good reason to ask why their elected representatives seem so eager to violate it and their oaths, and why they apparently have such contempt for their voters and their rights.

(1) I think he meant “revealed,” as in garbage pulled by that sanctimonious, asinine newspaper in New York and the execrable web site Gawker.

UPDATE: Gayle in the comments provides a link to a Post article about efforts to organize a boycott of New York’s new registration requirements. Go for it, people! Meanwhile, toward the end of the article is an interesting mention of the Empire State’s equivalent to the Second Amendment — its much more strongly worded equivalent:

The organizers point to a little-known guarantee of gun ownership contained in New York’s own “Civil Rights Law,” which was ratified the same year as the Constitution .

The state statute says the right to keep and bear arms “cannot be infringed” — stronger than the Second Amendment, which says it “shall not be infringed.’’

Now, that’s a statute, not a part of the state’s constitution, but it seems to me that gun-rights defenders in New York have a strong basis for a court case at both the state and federal levels. (Also makes one wonder how NYC gets away with its near-total ban.)

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

CAPTION THIS: Biden sworn in at #Inaugural2013 while Obama seemingly smirks

Heh. Via the Sacramento Bee:

Joe Biden is sworn in

President Barack Obama, center and Beau Biden, Attorney of Deleware, right, watch as his father Joe Biden is sworn in at the ceremonial swearing-in at the U.S. Capitol during the 57th Presidential Inauguration in Washington, Monday, Jan. 21, 2013.
Photo credit: Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

The look on Obama’s face as he looks at Biden is intriguing. Gotta wonder what he’s thinking there.

And for extra laughs from the VP on a day where conservatives weren’t laughing much at all, there is this:

“I’m proud to be president of the United States, but I am prouder to be — oh. . . I’m proud to be vice president of the United States. And I am prouder to be President Barack Obama’s vice president!”

— Joe Biden cracking up guests at the State Society of Iowa’s gala Saturday night with a classic gaffe — or, hmmm, just a 2016 Freudian slip? “Well, there goes that,” he laughed, amid lingering giggles in the crowd “Look, on a serious note. . . I guess I’m not going to get back to the serious note, am I?”

Video below:

On a much more serious note, as the pictures of Obama being sworn in rolled in on Twitter, I found I was more annoyed by the photos of Chief Justice John Roberts onstage than I was Obama. I just can’t look at him in the same way I used to. The ObamaCare ruling, and all that …

#MSDNC’s Tingles Matthews compares #Inaug2013 speech to … Gettysburg Address

This about sum’s up the nauseating tone of the fawning MSM coverage of our celebrity President’s second (and thank goodness – LAST) inaugural address today (via Eliana Johnson at NRO):

Barack Obama is perhaps the only modern president who has had the burden of swatting away comparisons between his own soaring rhetoric and that of our 16th president. You may recall that, in the wake of the Newtown massacre, Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter David Maraniss gushed over the president’s remarks, writing, “People will long remember what Barack Obama said in Newtown,” and calling the speech “[Obama’s] Gettysburg address.”

Today, thanks to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, it took less than five minutes for the comparison to be drawn between President Obama’s second inaugural address and, well, all manner of things Lincoln. “It reminds me of another second inaugural, Lincoln’s, so much of Lincoln in that speech, from the Gettysburg Address to the second inaugural itself,” Matthews said. “He talked about the government that we want, which is infrastructure, education, regulation, all the good things, and then recognizing that government can’t solve all the problems.”

Watch the video clip below:

Oh, did I mention it might be a good idea to have a barf bag handy before watching it? Oops.

Our so-called “unifying” “healing” President was anything but today, and for those of you who didn’t watch (I’m with you) you’ll understand just how much the “middle of the road” mask is off when you read gush-fests from popular liberal sites that talked about how Obama laid out his “progressive vision” for America.

The transcript of his speech is here.

Expect more disturbing attempts at “fundamentally transforming America” from our far leftist President over the next four long years. And be prepared to push back twice as hard as we did during his first term. As I said last year, him being re-elected means he is not accountable to anyone outside of his base anymore because he doesn’t have to worry about getting re-elected. And he doesn’t care if he takes down other “progressives” in the process of completely shedding his “compromiser in chief” mask. In fact, as long as he wraps his socialistic proposals in a pretty red bow “for the children”, he might not need to concern himself with down-ticket political fallout, because – as the last two Presidential election cycles have shown us – the American people, unfortunately, aren’t always so discerning when it comes to hollow, meaningless political rhetoric about “hope, change, and unity”, especially when it comes from a President who, alongside his staunchest supporters inside the media industrial complex and out, makes himself out to be the “Second Coming.”