### August 21, 2023 On August 22nd, the California Senate Public Safety Committee will hear Senate Joint Resolution 7, **to call for a constitutional convention to amend the U.S. Constitution, in order to spread California-style gun control schemes nationwide.**  Since we have learned through EV Mandates following CA, and that DE apparently follows CA’s emissions standards, wondering what the likelihood is that DE will follow along lockstep with this effort to call for a constitutional convention regarding “clarifying” our Second Amendment Rights as well. This was proposed June 8, 2023: —  Governor Newsom Proposes Historic 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution to End America’s Gun Violence Crisis: “Our ability to make a more perfect union is literally written into the Constitution,” said Governor Gavin Newsom. “So today, I’m **proposing the** **28th Amendment to the United States Constitution** to do just that. The 28th Amendment will enshrine in the Constitution common sense gun safety measures that Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and gun owners overwhelmingly support – while leaving the 2nd Amendment unchanged and respecting America’s gun-owning tradition.” The 28th Amendment will permanently enshrine four broadly supported gun safety principles into the U.S. Constitution: - Raising the federal minimum age to purchase a firearm from 18 to 21; - Mandating universal background checks to prevent truly dangerous people from purchasing a gun that could be used in a crime; - Instituting a reasonable waiting period for all gun purchases; and - **Barring civilian purchase of assault weapons** that serve no other purpose than to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time – weapons of war our nation’s founders never foresaw. Additionally, the 28th Amendment will **affirm Congress, states, and local governments can enact additional** common-sense gun safety **regulations** that save lives. Passage of the 28th Amendment will require a convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, also known as an **Article V Convention** or amendatory convention.  [https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/06/08/28th-amendment/](https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/06/08/28th-amendment/) [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) [https://www.nraila.org/articles/20230817/california-resolution-calling-for-a-constitutional-convention-to-redefine-the-second-amendment-scheduled-for-a-hearing](https://www.nraila.org/articles/20230817/california-resolution-calling-for-a-constitutional-convention-to-redefine-the-second-amendment-scheduled-for-a-hearing) —  And before this type of effort is dismissed as being unlikely to ever be ultimately ratified by a required 38 states, let’s keep in mind such ratification would be done via...voting machines - something we are all painfully aware has been corrupted.  Election Integrity concerns are more than just political offices - it’s one thing to lose a presidency for 4 years, obviously a Constitutional Convention of this nature would result in fundamental changes to the very fabric of our nation - abridging 2A is what elitist authoritarians have been striving to initiate for many decades.  Something to keep an eye on at least. --- ### August 22, 2023 Clarifications: - We the people do not vote directly for ratification of constitutional amendments of course, our representatives and senators in the State Legislatures do. - State legislatures select delegates to a constitutional convention; methods vary among states, apparently both houses typically, not sure what Delaware’s process is, but obviously our houses are still dominated by Democrats who are gun control fanatics. - Ultimately, again emphasizes the importance and integrity of elections, particularly state-level legislative elections; not only do they have more impact on our daily lives, they also could have an impact on our National Constitution.  - More important than ever to make sure our state legislature has some balance restored at least. Good resources on State government trifectas and triplexes:  [https://ballotpedia.org/State_government_trifectas#Delaware](https://ballotpedia.org/State_government_trifectas#Delaware) [https://ballotpedia.org/State_government_triplexes#Delaware](https://ballotpedia.org/State_government_triplexes#Delaware) Hopefully this effort on 2A is DOA, a publicity stunt by Newsom that falls flat, however, the Dems tend to operate in a more coordinated and lockstep manner than Republicans ever do. --- ### August 22, 2023 Additional notes: - The characterization of this as a “Constitutional Convention" was from CA governors office press release, also the NRA article, and other articles. Not to be conflated with any other Article V efforts. This CA "28th Amendment" effort is for a specific amendment and clear in their verbiage - if the semantics are incorrect that is their messaging nonetheless.  - Hopefully this Newsom 28th Amendment is a PR effort that doesn’t get traction. They are definitely trying to level up. Today’s hearing may be a bellwether. - Would not be surprised to see Delaware jump into the effort if they do get momentum as were are obviously in the crosshairs last June suddenly and touted by Biden. Again, turns out we follow their emissions standards, etc., and we have a compliant legislature. - Ultimately, if they get traction, Election Integrity is at the core of this process as it comes down to who have been elected, or selected, in state legislators - surely there has been rigging at that level if not here, certainly elsewhere. From a friend: "Election integrity is imperative. In my estimation the fight for our country must be multi faceted to succeed. Too many groups attack each other in the name of being “right”. I say pick your Pro-American effort and support other efforts as much as possible. Small minds equal small results. Great people are elected into office every cycle. Unfortunately, because of the current climate the longer they remain in office the more self-serving they become. It is up to us to use our God given right to rein them in before it is too late." Amen. --- ### August 22, 2023 > I'm sure this is more a publicity stunt for Newsom than anything else. Ratifying a new amendment takes 38 states. Do you really think there are 38 states that would want to gut the 2nd amendment? I think there is deep corruption, elections have been rigged for longer than we were aware, and there is a desire to disarm U.S. citizens by political elitists.  I don’t think the people want to gut the 2A, and as long as politicians represent the will of their constituents then no.  However, we are seeing a lot of politicians acting outside of representing their constituents and common sense, and radical elements, and we experienced a stolen presidential election. So, I am saying it is worthy of concern.  A lot of what we see happening in Delaware on 2A was shrugged off years ago as couldn’t happen, and then last year democrats passed legislation that some literally acknowledged was unconstitutional but passed regardless. We should prevail, but then we learn we can’t trust the judiciary or justice system either.  Just my opinion ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ --- ### August 24, 2023 The Liberals, Leftists, and Elitists are targeting the 2A - make no mistake. The unconstitutional Delaware Firearm laws are a copy of similar laws in New York and Maryland. Moreover, this is part of "the plan" to disarm citizens.  If they fail through the legislature and the judiciary, then they turn to corporations to push their ideology through their ESG agenda.  The 1st thing that the Nazis took from the Jews was their firearms. --- ### August 27, 2023 Gavin Newsom’s call, and Senate Joint Resolution, for a convention for proposing amendments to the US Constitution, specifically for proposing a 28th Amendment on “common sense gun restrictions”, is still in process...  - The Tuesday 8/22 hearing noted last week was postponed until this week, Tuesday 8/29 - Senate Rules were suspended for this on 8/24 - not sure what that means, but anytime I see “rules suspended” does not bode well.  Here is the SJR-7 history: [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) SJR-7 Federal constitutional convention: firearms.(2023-2024) 08/24/23 (Ayes 32. Noes 8.) 08/24/23 Senate Rules suspended. 08/22/23 Set for hearing August 29. 08/21/23 August 22 hearing postponed by committee. 08/16/23 Set for hearing August 22. 08/16/23 Referred to Com. on PUB S. 08/15/23 From printer. May be acted upon on or after September 14. 08/14/23 Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print. You can read the text of the bill online: [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) Text from the bill in their own words… **Start text from the SJR-7:** Relative to a federal constitutional convention.  LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SJR 7, as introduced, Wahab. Federal constitutional convention: firearms. The measure would apply to the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment relating to firearms, as specified. [bunch of WHERAS clauses…] Resolved by the Senate and the Assembly of the State of California, jointly, That the Legislature of the State of California, speaking on behalf of the people of the State of California, hereby applies to the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment that would do either, or both, of the following: (a) Affirm that federal, state, and local governments may adopt public safety regulations limiting aspects of firearms acquisition, possession, public carry, and use by individuals, and that such regulations are consistent with the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the understanding that throughout American history private individuals have possessed firearms for home defense, hunting, and recreational purposes; (b) Impose, as a matter of national policy, the following firearms regulations and prohibitions:  (1) universal background checks as a prerequisite to purchase or acquisition of a firearm,  (2) a prohibition on sales, loans, or other transfers of firearms to those under 21 years of age, subject to limited exceptions,  (3) a minimum waiting period after the purchase or acquisition of a firearm before that firearm may be delivered to the buyer or acquirer, and  (4) a prohibition on the private possession of assault weapons and other weapons of war; and be it further  Resolved, That this application is for a limited constitutional convention and does not grant Congress the authority to call a constitutional convention for any purpose other than those set forth herein and that this application shall be void if ever used at any stage to consider any constitutional amendments on subjects other than those specified herein; and be it further Resolved, That this application shall be considered as covering the same subject matter as applications from other states to the United States Congress to call a convention to propose a constitutional amendment for each respective purpose set forth herein and that this application shall be aggregated with such applications for the purpose of attaining the two-thirds of states necessary to require Congress to call a limited convention on each respective subject, but shall not be aggregated with any other applications on any other subject; and be it further Resolved, That the State of California intends that this application shall constitute a continuing application, considered together with any applications on the respective subject that other states have adopted or may in the future adopt, until such time as two-thirds of the several states have applied for a convention and said convention is convened by Congress; and be it further Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, the Majority Leader of the United States Senate, the Minority Leader of the United States Senate, and to each Senator and Representative from California in the Congress of the United States. **End of text from the SJR-7 text** - Again, many hope it’s a PR stunt that falls flat - that’d be great.  - However, this has gone beyond a Newsom’s news conference in June, to a CA Senate Joint Resolution, so, this is more that Newsom’s PR at play, this is now in their legislature, who voted 32-8 to "suspend rules”. - Obviously if successful in passing in their legislature, it’s no doubt the start of drive to bring more Article V applications on this subject matter - This effort, although out in CA, is something to be aware of and not something to dismiss out of hand because it is very likely the start of a concerted effort to limit our 2A guarantees. - And if so, Delaware which is politically and policy aligned with CA (ie, EV Mandates, emissions standards), and home to Biden, so good chance we’ll be in the mix.  - Unfortunately, given our Legislature’s Leftist make up at this stage, our hands may be tied at this point.  - And I’ll again suggest that our current state of political makeup (and elsewhere, say CA) is the consequence of decades of corruption in our voting systems and that fixing election integrity is essential for our constitutional republic.  When gov't is seeking ways to disarm us “for your safety”, I am certain there is a deeper agenda and a totally committed effort underway.  ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ --- ### August 28, 2023 "For 50 years, political insiders have been trying to suppress all knowledge of how to reform our government. No longer! In this book, America’s leading active scholar on the constitutional amendment process reveals how we can bypass Congress to win the reforms we need." Article V is the mechanism that Gavin Newsom, Leftists/Globalists, are seeking to utilize to try to bypass Congress. Article V is like a gun - there is no inherent issue with it when used by the right people for the right issues, but it can abused by the wrong people, even political insiders, for their own agenda.   Recall the Biden called on Congress to pass assault-weapons ban  in March 2023: "Biden has often urged U.S. lawmakers to enact new gun-control laws and referred to a 10-year federal ban on assault weapons that he helped negotiate — which expired in 2004. Analysts have said gun-control bills face a tough road in Congress, given issues like the narrowly divided Senate’s filibuster rule, in which 60 votes are required to end debate on most items." [https://www.marketwatch.com/story/biden-calls-for-congress-to-do-something-on-gun-control-after-nashville-school-shooting-ed593dd6](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/biden-calls-for-congress-to-do-something-on-gun-control-after-nashville-school-shooting-ed593dd6) And now, there was a shooting this weekend in Jacksonville which the media is collaboratively hyping, wherein they have apparently already discovered and released the shooters manifesto, since in this case it fit their agenda. And, well, the timing is coincidentally handy for the rescheduled CA hearing on the California Senate Joint Resolution tomorrow.  Just to be clear, I have no issue with Article V itself - the issue is the effort starting with CA's Senate Joint Resolution 7 to now utilize it as an end-run around Congress on their attack on 2A. --- ### August 30, 2023 Update on Newsom's 28th Amendment measure that would apply to the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment relating to firearms. **08/29/23** From committee: **Be adopted**. Ordered to third reading. (Ayes 3. Noes 1.) (August 29). [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) Looks like that means they will be pressing forward. --- ### September 1, 2023 “California Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution to “enshrine fundamental, broadly supported gun safety measures into law” gained approval this week from the California Senate’s Public Safety Committee.    The committee voted 3–1 in favor of Senate Joint Resolution 7, sending the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. If passed, it will head to the Assembly for consideration.” Again, in and of itself, California doing this in an nd of itself doesn’t mean much as they need another 33 states to make similar applications in order for Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments. I suggest Democrats have a tendency to work well together, have a plan, and this is just a start, priming the pump for the upcoming legislative sessions in coming year ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ https://thenewamerican.com/us/newsoms-proposed-gun-control-amendment-to-constitution-gains-approval --- ### September 5, 2023 Updates to CA proposed 28th Amendment effort: 09/01/23 Ordered to second reading. 09/01/23 Read third time and amended. 08/29/23 From committee: Be adopted. Ordered to third reading. (Ayes 3. Noes 1.) (August 29). Changes amended: They added a WHEREAS clause... WHEREAS, Since state leaders first announced their intention to introduce this joint resolution in June 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States has granted review in United States v. Rahimi, yet another case in which a court struck down a commonsense gun safety regulation, and the scourge of gun violence has continued unabated, with recent mass shootings bringing tragedy to communities across the country, further underscoring the need for urgent action; and ...these WHEREAS clauses should give insight into their strategy. Changed: (4) a prohibition on the _**private possession**_ of assault weapons and other weapons of **_war_**; and be it further To: (4) a prohibition on the _**sale, loan, or transfer of assault**_ weapons and other weapons of _**war to private civilians**_; and be it further Again, this is no doubt a template for what they will push to other states in their attempt to call for an Article V Convention. Here are all of the WHEREAS clauses from the text of the bill: WHEREAS, Approximately 49,000 Americans died in 2021 as a result of gun violence, and firearms are the leading cause of death for children under 18 years of age in the United States and the most common method of both homicide and suicide, and WHEREAS, It is estimated that there are approximately 393,000,000 firearms in civilian hands in the United States as of 2023, meaning that firearms now outnumber people in our country; and WHEREAS, Gun safety laws are proven to lessen the scourge of gun violence, as evidenced by the fact that since some of California’s most significant gun safety laws took effect in the early 1990s, California has cut its rate of gun death in half, and the state’s gun death rate is 39 percent lower than the national average as of 2023; and WHEREAS, Precedents of the Supreme Court of the United States, including its decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022) 142 S.Ct. 2111, have limited the ability of the states to enact and enforce reasonable restrictions on the public carry of firearms, and prompted challenges to many other common sense regulations, such as those allowing law enforcement officials to assess the potential dangerousness of individuals seeking to obtain firearms and prohibit possession of firearms by those deemed dangerous, and those restricting possession of certain particularly dangerous weapons, including weapons of war; and WHEREAS, Modern technology and capabilities, including semiautomatic firing mechanisms, capacity, range, accuracy, and use of specialized ammunition, of the firearms commercially available today make them far more lethal than anything the founders could have imagined in the 18th century, when most weapons needed to be reloaded after every shot; and WHEREAS, Common sense public safety regulations limiting aspects of firearms acquisition, possession, public carry, and use by individuals, including, but not limited to, the types of firearms and ammunition that private individuals may possess, categories of private individuals who may not acquire or possess firearms, and locations where private individuals may carry firearms, as well as procedures to ensure that individuals possessing or seeking to acquire or publicly carry firearms will not pose a threat to the safety of themselves or others or use a firearm in furtherance of otherwise unlawful conduct, are proven to save lives; and WHEREAS, Since state leaders first announced their intention to introduce this joint resolution in June 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States has granted review in United States v. Rahimi, yet another case in which a court struck down a commonsense gun safety regulation, and the scourge of gun violence has continued unabated, with recent mass shootings bringing tragedy to communities across the country, further underscoring the need for urgent action; and WHEREAS, Amending the United States Constitution as described herein will ensure that federal, state, and local government can effectively pursue common sense solutions to this deadly nationwide problem, consistent with the understanding that throughout American history private individuals have possessed firearms for home defense, hunting, and recreational purposes; and WHEREAS, Article V of the Constitution of the United States requires the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention upon application of two-thirds of the legislatures of the several states for the purpose of proposing amendments to the United States Constitution; --- ### September 7, 2023 Most news articles regarding this are from June when it was announced. Some were and are quick to dismiss this Article V effort, but they are moving along as they do in plain sight…again, many of us only learned recently that we follow CA’s emissions standards, and seeking to following the Electric Vehicle regulations, so it is not a far stretch that DE becomes part of this effort.     09/06/23 In Assembly. Held at Desk. 09/06/23 Ordered to the Assembly. 09/06/23 Adopted. (Ayes 24. Noes 11.) 09/06/23 Read third time. 09/05/23 Read second time. Ordered to third reading. “Gov. Gavin Newsom has called for a U.S. Constitutional amendment to lock in gun restrictions nationwide that are based on California rules.” [https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/read-the-text-of-california-gov-gavin-newsom-s-resolution-calling-for-a-constitutional-amendment-on-gun-control/ar-AA1gbHbk](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/read-the-text-of-california-gov-gavin-newsom-s-resolution-calling-for-a-constitutional-amendment-on-gun-control/ar-AA1gbHbk) --- ### September 7, 2023 >Gov Newsome doesn’t change the constitution.  It take 2/3 rds of states to do that.  He can take a flying leap! > If Newsom doesn't want a gun, he doesn't need to have one.  Flying leap, VERY high cliff. --- ### September 7, 2023 Here is the opening paragraph from Title 7 of the Delaware Code. Take note this section of the DE Code was established in 2013. 12/11/2013  1.0 Purpose 1.1 The provisions of this regulation **establish in Delaware a Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) program, which incorporates the requirements of the California LEV program**. 1.2 The LEV program shall apply to all new model year 2014 and subsequent model year motor vehicles that are passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty passenger vehicles, and medium-duty vehicles subject to the California LEV program and delivered for sale in Delaware   The word "California" is used 27 times in section 1140 !!!! The language makes it clear that if California tightens its EV standards then Delaware automatically follows, no legislative oversight! If California chooses to drive over the EV cliff then Delaware will be close behind Let's remind the Delaware legislative majority that Delaware law is made in Dover not Sacramento (where ever that is) --- ### September 7, 2023 Of course passing this does not in and of itself change the Constitution - never suggested it.  Newsom is seeking to start the process of getting the requisite number of states, 2/3rds, to make application to the United States Congress to call a convention under Article V of the Constitution for the purpose of proposing amendments. Ultimately amendments need to be ratified by the legislatures or by conventions in 3/4th of the states. It is a long road for sure, but again, the Democrats operate in unison and for something of this nature, be sure there is a plan. This was initially dismissed in June as a PR stunt, but is moving ahead in CA. And, while we’d all like to hope that there isn’t enough Democrat majority State Legislatures, don’t trust Establishment Republicans - take a look at what is happening in Texas with AG Paxton’s impeachment: "GOP-controlled Texas House impeaches Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, triggering suspension" [https://apnews.com/article/texas-attorney-general-paxton-impeachment-d0fa9114868adca63d55a21a53765c45](https://apnews.com/article/texas-attorney-general-paxton-impeachment-d0fa9114868adca63d55a21a53765c45) Recall Biden called on Congress to do something about “assault weapons” again this March…which of course didn’t amount to anything. Good chance the play may be to point out that “failure” for Congress to act, and hence Biden will help push for states to call for an Article V convention as initiated by CA, and Carney and our Democrat legislators will no doubt play along. Recall our state legislature passed unconstitutional gun control laws that they suddenly had ready last year end of session right after the Uvalde shootings, and they did so knowing they were unconstitutional - I’m sure they are looking to level up. I recall that recently someone in US Congress proposed a bill calling for Congress to propose an amendment - something to that effect, I don’t recall the details, but I think it was firearms related. 2/3rds of both Houses of US Congress would need be needed to propose amendments, which is the traditional route of course. If anyone recalls and can point to that, I think it was earlier this summer. Another tough road too, but a couple more false flag events, and who knows - just a coincidence I’m sure we’re all sure about :)  Thank you Eric on the particulars on the CA emissions regulations. Until this spring, I’m sure most of us had no idea DE was following CA’s emissions regulations, though we were all painfully aware Carney was lockstep with Democrat states on the COVID front.  If giving out flying leaps where a thing, we could fix a lot of things ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ --- ### September 8, 2023 Update:  09/07/23 Referred to Com. on PUB. S. [Public Safety Committee] [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) Meanwhile in New Mexico...suspect there will be some synergy here, and of course the Governor knows it’s unconstitutional but will toss it to the courts, which we know we can no longer trust either.  **[New Mexico] Governor bans carrying guns in Albuquerque after 11-year-old killed ** "Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on Friday announced a new **public health order** that, she said, will **ban people from carrying firearms, either open or concealed**, in Albuquerque and throughout Bernalillo County for the next 30 days, **regardless of whether they have a permit.** "Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, issued an executive order Thursday evening **declaring gun violence a public health emergency.**  "During a news conference Friday, she said she expects legal challenges to the public health order and expressed uncertainty about whether the order would prevail in court.” [https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/governor-bans-carrying-guns-in-albuquerque-after-11-year-old-killed/article_a02a0b24-4e59-11ee-85ee-db977338b047.html](https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/governor-bans-carrying-guns-in-albuquerque-after-11-year-old-killed/article_a02a0b24-4e59-11ee-85ee-db977338b047.html) A “public health emergency” - we know that’s a go-to now. Newsom’s Article V application bill does not mention “public health”, yet. Won’t be surprised if the Public Safety Committee inserts that language. --- ### September 9, 2023 Just spitballing here…  New Mexico Governor’s approach is to declare an “emergency” in order to abrogate 2A constitutional rights, which makes CA Governor’s approach of calling for an Article V convention on 2A appear more “reasonable” over arbitrary “emergency” declarations.  - Thesis/Problem: Criminal gun violence in a State  - Antithesis/Reaction: State makes unconstitutional gun restrictions  - Synthesis/Solution: Constitutional gun restrictions via constitutional amendments proposed by States via Article V  This is the Hegelian Dialectic that the Left uses with great effect, as solutions always move to the Left incrementally.  If attached video does not come through, also available here:  --- ### September 9, 2023 > Folks, It’s pretty clear to me they are coming after law abiding citizens not the criminals any way possible.   >This New Mexico Governor obviously saw that the government emergency powers worked for them during the “plandemic “so now she’s using them for whatever she wants.  I have no doubt we will be witnessing this across the USA.   >Our Federal Government is already trying to relinquish our sovereignty to the World Health Organization (WHO) World Economic Forum (WEF) the United Nations (UN) and the CCP. Make no mistake about it! --- ### September 9, 2023 I’d say we are only a narrative-fitting gun incident away from other states following. In this case, it was a road rage incident, and they don’t have the shooter - who is of course not one who will be abiding by the Governor’s “emergency” powers. [https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/police-id-11-year-old-boy-killed-in-road-rage-related-shooting/](https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/police-id-11-year-old-boy-killed-in-road-rage-related-shooting/) Question: “Madam Governor, do you really think that criminals are going to hear this message and not carry a gun in Albuquerque on the streets for 30 days?” Governor: “Uh no.” Joyce, you are 100% and this is has been a long going effort, going back at least 100+ years. We have ceded sovereignty in other ways that I’ve only been peripherally aware of, and only recently learning of the significance of, particularly, Congress ceded their authority on regulate commerce with foreign nations, ie, Trade Agreements, Partnerships and Treaties, via the Trade Promotion Authority (aka Fast Track) in early ’70’s. We’ve all heard about it no doubt in the context of NAFTA perhaps, but it is another example of an end run around our Constitution.   [https://tloring.wtf/p/trade-promotion-authority](https://tloring.wtf/p/trade-promotion-authority) --- ### September 9, 2023 Ultra Liberal Ted Lieu: “I support gun safety laws. However, this order from the Governor of New Mexico violates the U.S. Constitution. No state in the union can suspend the federal Constitution. There is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution.”  I have seen other liberal gun-controller posts with similar phrasings, which I’d say is a talking point to tee up support for going the Constitutional route, which would be via Article V, either by 2/3rds of both Houses proposing amendments, or 3/4 of States applying to Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments.  Just when CA has a 28th Amendment application in the works on this very topic ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ --- ### September 9, 2023 Correction: not 3/4ths of States applications… Congress on the Application of the Legislatures of 2/3rds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments (34 States) Ratification is by the Legislatures of 3/4ths of the several States, or by Conventions in 3/4ths thereof (38 States) --- ### September 10, 2023 >So it is safe to assume that all gun violence in Albuquerque will cease.  This is something we should be closely monitoring.   > Would I be correct in understanding that if a constitutional convention is called, let's say for "limiting Federal overreach", when convened ANY ammendment can be presented - such as one pertaining to 2A?  Kind of like how at a debate they have one minute to speak, but it doesn't necessarily have to be on the given topic. 🤔 Newsom is proposing a call for a convention for a specific proposed amendment regarding 2A, though the Constitution sets no other terms for the call: \[The Congress] “on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments” …by the way, there are many Article V efforts which have been ongoing for decades, and apparently there  has even been points with 2/3rds states, but has never resulted in Congress calling a Convention. Currently, as I understand, the Balanced Budget Amendment effort is the closest with 29 States.  Again, Newsom’s effort I see a potential start of a concerted effort specifically on 2A, because disarming the US is critical to “the hard road to world order”.  So, conspiratorial insiders may achieve what others have not thus far.  Hopefully this results in a boomerang effect though, and it opens more eyes than they anticipated. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_applications_for_an_Article_V_Convention --- ### September 12, 2023 CA's 9/4/23 Senate Floor Analysis document - it is short, just 9 pages; the analysis portion provides insight into their strategy. And by "their", I mean the Left in general, as I'm sure this will be a template for other states. [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) --- ### September 24, 2023 Update on CA SJR-7 Federal constitutional convention: firearms.(2023-2024) - I wasn’t sure the status of this bill, but it did pass in CA, per official press release: **California Becomes First State in America to Call for Constitutional Convention on Right to Safety / Published: Sep 15, 2023** SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposal to amend the United States Constitution with a Right to Safety achieved a major milestone today as California became the first state in the nation to call for a Constitutional Convention for gun safety. With the Assembly’s approval of Senate Joint Resolution 7 authored by Senator Aisha Wahab and Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer, California has officially requested a constitutional convention. [https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/09/15/california-becomes-first-state-in-america-to-call-for-constitutional-convention-on-right-to-safety/](https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/09/15/california-becomes-first-state-in-america-to-call-for-constitutional-convention-on-right-to-safety/) — Also, coincidentally…on Sep 22, 2023, a week later: Remarks by President Biden on Gun Safety re: White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, headed by Kamala Harris. I know we all share the same regard for her, but I don’t think it is insignificant that she’s also from CA. They do not mention the CA’s SJR-7 Federal constitutional convention call, but again, I think this will be the strategy based on the remarks below, I’d say they are teeing it up as they seek to push Congress to do more, centralize, accelerate and intensify efforts, drive and coordinate a gov't and nationwide effort… —  **Remarks by President Biden on Gun Safety** “And, by the way, I was the guy — along with a woman in California — who also — **we once banned assault weapons and multiple magazines. We’re going to do it again**. “We’re not stopping here. Again, it’s — I’ll say it again. I’m not going to be quiet until we get it done: **It’s time again to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.** Look, while we push — **we push for Congress to do more,** we’re going to **centralize, accelerate, and intensify** our work to save more lives more quickly. That’s why this new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention — it’s what it’s designed to do. It will **drive and coordinate a government and a nationwide effort** to reduce gun violence in America. And it will be overseen by an incredible vice president, who understands this — (applause) — more than any vice president has. No, really. That’s not hyperbole. That’s a fact. She’s been on the frontlines of this issue her entire career as a prosecutor, as an attorney general, and as a United States senator. Her deep experience will be invaluable for this office. The office will have four primary responsibilities: First, to expedite the implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and the executive actions already announced. And I mean it: We’re going to fully implement it. Second, coordinate more support for survivors, families, and communities affected by gun violence, including mental health care, financial assistance — the same way FEMA responds to natural disasters. (Applause.) The same way. And it helps folks recover and rebuild and alter. Look, folks, shootings are the ultimate superstorm, ripping through communities. Third, identify new executive actions we can take within our legal authority to reduce gun violence. And fourth, **expand our coalition of partners in states** and cities across America because we do have partners to get more — we need more state and local help to get these laws passed locally as well — and to strengthen our laws and give us more hope. [https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/09/22/remarks-by-president-biden-on-gun-safety/](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/09/22/remarks-by-president-biden-on-gun-safety/) —  This moved pretty quickly, basically a month, which seems remarkably quick… [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SJR7) - 09/21/23 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 175, Statutes of 2023. - 09/21/23 Enrolled and filed with the Secretary of State at 2 p.m. - 09/14/23 In Senate. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling. - 09/14/23 Ordered to the Senate. - 09/14/23 Adopted. - 09/14/23 Read third time. - 09/13/23 From committee: Be adopted. Ordered to third reading. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (September 13). - 09/12/23 Joint Rule 62(a) suspended. - 09/12/23 Assembly Rule 46 and 74(d) suspended. - 09/07/23 Referred to Com. on PUB. S. - 09/06/23 In Assembly. Held at Desk. - 09/06/23 Ordered to the Assembly. - 09/06/23 Adopted. (Ayes 24. Noes 11.) - 09/06/23 Read third time. - 09/05/23 Read second time. Ordered to third reading. - 09/01/23 Ordered to second reading. - 09/01/23 Read third time and amended. - 08/29/23 From committee: Be adopted. Ordered to third reading. (Ayes 3. Noes 1.) (August 29). - 08/24/23 (Ayes 32. Noes 8. Page 2176.) - 08/24/23 Senate Rules suspended. - 08/22/23 Set for hearing August 29. - 08/21/23 August 22 hearing postponed by committee. - 08/16/23 Set for hearing August 22. - 08/16/23 Referred to Com. on PUB S. - 08/15/23 From printer. May be acted upon on or after September 14. - 08/14/23 Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print. ---