Reader’s Links for April 24th, 2025

Posted on by

Each day at just after midnight Eastern, a post like this one is created for contributors and readers of this site to upload news links and video links on the issues that concern this site. Most notably, Islam and its effects on Classical Civilization, and various forms of leftism from Soviet era communism, to postmodernism and all the flavours of galloping statism and totalitarianism such as Nazism and Fascism which are increasingly snuffing out the classical liberalism which created our near, miraculous civilization the West has been building since the time of Socrates.

This document was written around the time this site was created, for those who wish to understand what this site is about. And while our understanding of the world and events has grown since then, the basic ideas remain sound and true to the purpose.

So please post all links, thoughts and ideas that you feel will benefit the readers of this site to the comments under this post each day. And thank you all for your contributions.

This is the new Samizdat. We must use it while we can.

For those interested, please check out https://vladtepesblog.substack.com/ as an another avenue of expression. The Substack is a different project in a sense. It is older videos that in the light of subsequent events, look different or of increased importance, Check it out now and again if you like.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

16 Replies to “Reader’s Links for April 24th, 2025”

  4. Russian Artist Reveals Mystery Trump Portrait Gifted By Putin To President Donald Trump
    CNN-News18 – April 23, 2025

  7. Are Gun Permit-to-Purchase Laws Unconstitutional?
    Ammoland Inc. Posted on April 24, 2025 by Alan Chwick, Joanne D Eisen & Gary Mauser

    Opinion by Alan J. Chwick
    AdobeStock_Rawpixel 136179711

    Illegal “gun violence” in the United States is an issue, prompting lawmakers to explore various strategies for regulation, regulations that usually affect law-abiding citizens more than the criminals.

    Among these regulations, Permit-to-Purchase (PTP) laws have emerged as a means to screen and delay prospective gun buyers. These laws require individuals to undergo multiple(in the case of NJ & NY) background checks, and sometimes safety training or other procedural requirements, before acquiring a firearm. While proponents argue that such laws help reduce “gun violence” and suicide rates, critics assert that they place uncontitutional burdens on law-abiding citizens and violate Second Amendment (2A) protections, plus there is already a Federal background check system NICS in place for retail purchases. The constitutional debate gained new momentum after the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Bruen, which shifted the legal framework for evaluating gun regulations.
    Illinois FOID Cards Top 2,000,000 Gun Owners
    Illinois FOID Cards File Photo

    Permit-to-Purchase permission-slip laws exist in several states, including Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Hawaii, and these laws vary in scope and requirements, but typically require an applicant to:

    Submit an application with personal information.
    Pay a non-refundable fee,
    Undergo a background check that sometimes has an additional fee.
    Sometimes, it requires fingerprints, which may incur another fee.
    Complete firearms safety training, which may also incur another fee.

    The intention behind these laws is to ensure that only individuals who meet specific “approved” criteria, such as not having a criminal background or a history of mental illness, can legally purchase firearms. Though studies suggest that states with PTP laws have lower rates of gun-related deaths (Kaufman et al., 2015), it’s again IMPORTANT to point out that gun dealers are REQUIRED to do a Federal background check (NICS E-Check), so what is the real purpose of the state PTP? And could the NICS Check be the actual reason for the lower rates?

    The 2A to the United States Constitution reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” The operative clause here is “shall not be infringed” (Ammoland (1), 2025).

    Historically, the scope of the 2A was unclear until the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).

    In Heller, the Court held that the 2A protects an individual’s right to possess firearms for lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. However, the Court also noted that this right is not unlimited and that certain regulatory measures are permissible.

    In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Court extended this interpretation to the states through the 14th Amendment.

    The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) decision marked a pivotal shift in 2A jurisprudence. The Court struck down New York’s “may-issue” concealed carry law, ruling that it violated the 2A by granting too much discretion to local authorities in issuing permits.

    The Court introduced a new test for evaluating gun regulations: laws must be consistent with the “historical tradition of firearm regulation” in the United States. This test replaced the previous two-step approach that involved means-end scrutiny, and additionally, it adjusted Heller’s “this right is not unlimited and that certain regulatory measures are permissible.”

    Following Bruen, courts have reevaluated existing gun laws under the historical tradition standard. PTP laws now face new scrutiny:

    In Maryland Shall Issue v. Moore (2023), a federal court struck down Maryland’s PTP law, stating it lacked historical precedent.
    In contrast, other courts have upheld PTP laws by improperly drawing analogies to historical licensing and surety laws from the 18th and 19th centuries.

    So, currently, the constitutionality of PTP laws hinges on whether historical analogs can be identified, as per Bruen, and the Bruen ruling emphasized examining historical regulations from the time of the Founding Fathers. While no direct PTP laws existed in the 18th century, there were, however:

    Surety laws, which required individuals suspected of carrying weapons to post a bond.
    Militia laws, which required individuals to report for training with their firearms.
    Prohibitions on arming certain groups, such as felons or those deemed dangerous.

    Proponents of PTP laws argue that these historical practices support the idea of regulating who can possess firearms, thereby justifying modern permitting schemes.

    They claim:

    Public Safety: These laws prevent firearms from falling into the hands of dangerous individuals.
    Constitutional Flexibility: The 2A allows for regulations that serve compelling governmental interests.
    Historical Justification: Historical practices, while not identical, suggest an intent to regulate arms to some extent.
    Judicial Precedents: Prior to Bruen, courts upheld similar regulatory schemes under intermediate scrutiny (e.g., Kachalsky v. County of Westchester, 2012).

    The critics of P2P laws argue:

    Impose Burdens: Due to bureaucratic hurdles, they may delay or prevent lawful gun ownership.
    Lack Historical Basis: No direct historical equivalent of PTP laws existed during the founding era.
    Create Inequities: Fees and training requirements may disproportionately affect low-income individuals.
    Open Door to Discretion: If poorly implemented, PTP laws can give authorities excessive power over who may exercise a constitutional right.

    A major challenge in the debate over PTP laws is balancing the individual’s right to bear arms with what the government claims is its responsibility to ensure public safety. Proponents claim that Constitutional rights are not absolute; courts have long held that rights can be regulated when justified by compelling state interests, such as the example of the First Amendment right to free speech does not allow incitement to violence (Ammoland (2), 2025). Yelling fire in a theater, if there IS A FIRE, is good! But if there is no fire and people get hurt, there will be consequences.

    Given the evolving legal landscape, the future of PTP laws remains uncertain. Courts will continue to grapple with how to apply the Bruen test and what constitutes a valid historical analogue. Legislative bodies may adjust their laws to align more closely with constitutional requirements. Legal scholars suggest that the Supreme Court may eventually provide more clarity by taking on a case directly challenging a PTP law. Until then, inconsistencies among lower courts are expected.

    PTP laws occupy a very contentious space in American constitutional law at this time. They are supposedly designed to ‘enhance public safety’ by preventing dangerous individuals from acquiring firearms, but their procedural requirements raise great concerns about accessibility and constitutional validity.

    PTP Laws, sound like a great idea!
    With the best of intentions!
    What could possibly go wrong?

    Hopefully, the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision with its stricter standard for evaluating such laws, demanding historical consistency, will correctly put PTP to bed for good.

    References:

    Ammoland (1)(2025). U.S. Second Amendment: Means ALL Weapons & ZERO Infringements.
    Ammoland (2)(2025). “Congress Shall Make No Law” vs. “Shall Not Be Infringed, (Ammoland, 2025)
    District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).
    McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010).
    New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. ___ (2022).
    Kaufman, E. J., Morrison, C. N., Branas, C. C., Wiebe, D. J. (2015). State firearm laws and interstate firearm deaths. Preventive Medicine, 74, 28-30.
    Maryland Shall Issue v. Moore, No. 21-1985 (4th Cir. 2023).
    Kachalsky v. County of Westchester, 701 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2012).
    Spitzer, R. J. (2017). Gun Law History in the United States and Second Amendment Rights. Law and Contemporary Problems, 80(2), 55-83.
    Winkler, A. (2011). Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. W. W. Norton & Company.

    https://www.ammoland.com/2025/04/are-gun-permit-to-purchase-laws-unconstitutional/

  8. Mass Shooting in Kashmir Enabled by Futile, Deadly ‘Gun Control’
    Ammoland Inc. Posted on April 24, 2025 by David Codrea
    The tourists, of course, were helpless, and when seconds counted, authorities were minutes away. iStock-1327769366
    The tourists, of course, were helpless, and when seconds counted, authorities were minutes away. iStock-1327769366

    “Rage and despair after brazen attack kills 26 in Kashmir,” a Wednesday BBC headline reads. “A group of gunmen opened fire on Tuesday on tourists at a resort in Pahalgam, a picturesque town in the Himalayas often described as the ‘Switzerland of India’.”

    “[T]here is no official confirmation on the numbers yet from the government,” the report says about “the attack [which] took place on Tuesday afternoon.”

    The only thing that can be confirmed is that the murderers ignored India’s draconian citizen disarmament edicts, and their victims were helpless to do anything but “run for cover” or be shot.

    “India has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world, making it difficult to obtain a gun license and own a firearm,” CNBC TV 18 reported. “The Arms Act, 1959, bans the sale and possession of firearms without a license, with a few exceptions for high-ranking government officials, defence officers, and professional shooters.”

    “According to the Arms Act, carrying weapons is punishable with jail term and a fine,” Deccan Herald explained. “An additional 2019 amendment, further sought to reduce the number of licenced firearms that a person can possess. It also proposed strict punishment for possession of illegal firearms [and] also tendered life imprisonment for making illegal firearms.”

    None of that stopped the Resistance Front killers, armed with M4 carbines and AK-47s, though, did it? The only people the laws stopped were the “law-abiding,” that is, the ones being slaughtered.
    When is that not the case?

    It certainly was that way in 2008 in Mumbai, when 10 armed attackers killed “ at least 174 people, including 20 security force personnel and 26 foreign nationals… More than 300 people were injured.”

    An account in the International Tribune detailed some of the terror:

    “At the Taj, the gunmen broke in room after room and shot occupants at point-blank range. Some were shot in the back. At the Oberoi Hotel, the second luxury hotel to be attacked, one gunman chased diners up a stairwell and at one point turned around and shot dead an elderly man standing behind him.”

    And as we’ve seen in our own domestic mass shootings in supposedly “gun-free zones,” from Columbine, to Parkland, to Uvalde, the police were hesitant to engage. Per the Independent:

    But what angered Mr D’Souza almost as much were the masses of armed police hiding in the area who simply refused to shoot back. “There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything,” he said. “At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, ‘Shoot them, they’re sitting ducks!’ but they just didn’t shoot back.”

    “The message from Mumbai, the lesson we can salvage, is unmistakably simple and clear: Disarming people renders them defenseless. Predators don’t obey disarmament edicts. Authorities can’t protect you,” I wrote for GUNS Magazine in 2009. “Will we learn it, or will we wait for another ‘gun free zone’ massacre to happen here, with the attendant cries from the ignorant and the ambitious for yet more ‘gun control’?”
    The Kashmir massacre answers that question.

    https://www.ammoland.com/2025/04/mass-shooting-in-kashmir-enabled-by-futile-deadly-gun-control/

  9. Viktor Orban considers vetoing an EU extension of Russian sanctions on its assets. This would force the EU and the U.S. to underwrite the $50 billion loan given to the Ukraine for which the Russian assets were used as collateral. This would be a major hit to EU taxpayers given that the $50-billion is likely already stolen by Uke oligarchs and will never be repaid. In other words Orban may expose the EU (Communist International) for being the corrupt bloodsuckers they are.

    Meanwhile, thousands of young men continue to be slaughtered by Zelensky, who refuses peace.

    https://youtu.be/UlkuyjlGtBM?si=nnVeYmDc488VBdpR

  10. China’s Stranglehold on America’s Drug Supply: Rosemary Gibson
    This is the 30 minute TV version of Jan Jekielek’s interview with Rosemary Gibson. The longer-form version was released on Epoch TV on April 10, 2025.
    American Thought Leaders – The Epoch Times – April 19, 2025

  12. No surrender’: Zelensky rebukes Trump-Putin peace plan | Ukraine: The Latest

    Today, as Kyiv is hit by the deadliest strikes in almost a year, we examine Donald Trump’s attack on President Zelensky having failed to negotiate the peace deal he said would take him only 24 hours. Then we take a deep dive into the Wagner mercenary group with the author of a new book who says Yevgeny Prigozhin’s outfit is the logical outcome when a country contracts its soul to a pitiless militia.

    Content Referenced:
    Candice’s Book, ‘Putin’s Sledgehammer: The Wagner Group and Russia’s Collapse into Mercenary Chaos’:
    https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/tit…

    Telegraph Ukraine Live Blog:
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-new…

    Trump blames Zelensky for derailing peace talks (The Telegraph):
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-new…
    The Telegraph – April 24, 2025

  13. It looks like the Dems have chosen the hill they want to die on, it is a doozy, they are going to defend MS13 members and fight to return them to the US to rape, murder and steal from more US citizens.

    If this seems wild to you it is worse for me, the Kilmar Abrego Garcia was tried in two immigration courts and both found that he was a member of MS13 who is illegally in the United States. Yes one Judge ruled he couldn’t be sent back to El Salvador because a rival gang wanted to kill him, the current President of El Salvador has destroyed all of the criminal gangs in his country so that restriction is removed. If the Dems continue to fight for the criminal aliens in the US the Repubs will gain seats in next years elections and solidify their control of Congress.

    We are living in a time when the direction that all of Western Civilization moves is being changed back towards small government and large freedom. it is going to take several years for this movement to become apparent to everyone but we are headed in that direction. The big problem is that the left is losing and will do what they always do when they are losing, they will turn violent, we have seen this before in other nations and usually this has resulted in a shift left for the nation affected. We can’t allow this to happen the Western Nations are so far to the left any shift to the left will result in full communism and a much longer and bloodier time for freedom to be restored.

    As this historical movement plays out always remember that all types of politicians are motivated by the desire for power. Leftist politicians more then centrist and rightist but they are all motivated by the desire for power. Fortunately not all national leaders are politicians some are Patriots who are motivated by the desire to save their nations. Hopefully the current crop of non political national leaders will manage to save their nations without becoming addicted to power. Yes the politicians steal money from their governments but this money is used to buy power, remember politicians want the power to force you to do what they want no matter what you want.

  14. Browder: U.S. wavering on Ukraine will force Europe to seize $200B of Russian assets | On The Record – TVP World Polish Public Broadcast Service – 18 hours ago

  15. Ukraine’s frontline city where Russia abandoned its dead | Kharkiv dispatch | The Telegraph – January 14, 2025