Wednesday, April 30, 2008

High Court Slaps Bloomberg Down

New York Mayor Bloomberg wanted to sue gun-makers into bankruptcy (Makes you wonder where his cops are going to get their guns), but the High Court "slapped him down." They said, " The Second Amendment Foundation said today’s dismissal of a lawsuit filed against the firearms industry by anti-gun New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg should send a clear message that “courthouse demagoguery and harassment of law-abiding business is not the responsible way to fight crime.” Maybe Bloomberg ought to start allowing honest citizens to be armed to defend themselves against those ubiquitous illegally-armed criminals who have made his city one of the "murder capitals of the world." (SAF)

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

"Wild West Shooting?"

What it actually was, is one customer started shooting and the store clerk decided not to kill him because he was a "lousy shot. Meanwhile, Drudge headlined it, "Managers, customer all (all?) draw guns in West Palm Beach grocery..." leading to the thought that the liberals were right. But they weren't. It was the same thing that could have happened anywhere in the country, but because the clerk had a "license to carry," the "crazy" didn't kill anyone and because the clerk thought fast, even the attacker was not killed. Completely different from the picture painted by the headlines. This was NOT a "wild west shooting." It was ONE man shooting at a clerk, who decided since he was a lousy shot he (the shooter) was not dangerous and so did not kill him. Proof Again, that more legal guns in the hands of honest people can reduce crime.But these headlines put me in mind of a movie I once saw where two gunmen went into a bar to hold it up. Turns out it was a "cop bar" and soon they were surrounded with cocked guns. Funniest thing I've ever seen. (Palm Beach Post)

Saturday, April 26, 2008

I Knew It!

While the Republicans were "in charge" in Colorado, they FINALLY managed to pass a law making it easier to carry a concealed weapon. One of the things I knew was coming up when the Democrats became the majority in the Colorado Legislature was to destroy that law, and they're already talking about it, using a "gun problem" they had in the Capitol building itself as an excuse. Funny; ad I remember it, harder "concealed carry laws" would not have changed anything in that situation where a man actually got into the building with a gun (he conned a government employee into carrying in) and was killed for his trouble. Seems to me the problem is with the building's security, not with "concealed carry" laws. (Defense Mechanism)

Useless "Gun Laws"

In Chicago, Illinois, where they have some of the most draconian "anti-gun" laws, there have been 35 shootings and 9 deaths over ONE weekend recently. If that doesn't show the futility of making laws against gun ownership for honest people, I don't know what does. In prison, where they don't even allow the GUARDS to carry guns, there are many murders. Some with smuggled-in guns, and others with home-made knives. Which just goes to show that if guns suddenly disappeared from the world, murder and violence would not. If there were no guns, people who want to commit violence will find a way.

Friday, April 25, 2008

Obama: "Americans Don't Need Guns!"

Well, there you have it. Obama is an "anti-gun nut." He ignores all the shooting going on in "gun-free zones" and in other places where gun laws don't allow HONEST people who OBEY laws to be armed to protect themselves from ILLEGALLY-armed criminals who don't obey laws, anyway. What is it about Democrats that they can't see the truth when it stares them in the face? I don't know very many "anti-gun" Republicans because most Republicans are more intelligent than Democrats. Ann Coulter was right when she titled one of her books, "If Democrats Were Intelligent, They'd Be Republicans!" Obama SAYS he "respects the Second Amendment," but local gun laws are okay. How can that be if you can use logic? The Constitution and its Second Amendment is there specifically to STOP "local laws" against gun ownership and the carrying thereof. It is there to CONTROL the laws made by the states. But like a typical ignorant liberal, he "speaks out of both sides of his mouth" when he says we "don't need guns." We DO. To defend ourselves against the illegally-armed criminals the laws he likes will create. (On The Issues)

Thursday, April 24, 2008

Beat Up by a Granny

I wonder how much "street cred" a 46-year-old burglar has when his friends find out he was repeatedly stabbed by a 95-year-old granny in a wheelchair (!) with a screwdriver as he tried to break into her house? Seems like he couldn't get far enough into her house to stop her from stabbing him. Soon he passed out from blood loss and the granny called the cops, who took him to the hospital, then to jail. What an embarrassment! Maybe he'll go into another line of work. (Paul Harvey)

"Gun-Free Zones" Are "Death Zones!"

The "anti-gun jerks" are still trying to use mass school shootings as an excuse to make yet more "anti-gun laws" instead of making the use of a gun in the commission of a crime mean many more years in prison for criminals--which would be a good response. Another good response would be to allow potential victims to be armed in their own defense so they can KILL such a crazy before he can kill more people. But NO! They don't trust innocent people to have their own guns for self-defense. They still think a CRIMINAL, who breaks laws every day, would OBEY a law that says he can't be armed, which is patent stupidity. Did any of those CRIMINALS who went onto school campuses (Which were "gun-free zones") even stop and THINK about the guns they were about to use to kill innocent people were ILLEGAL? No. They knew they probably wouldn't survive it themselves, so why worry about obeying laws?The only answer is to kill them before they can complete their "mission." But the "anti-gun freaks" never learn. They're stupid and they're determined to stay that way. (CCRKBA)

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Typical "School Official" Stupidity

In North Carolina, "school officials" at East Wake School have banned the attendance of its school shooting team at a state-wide competition because of its "zero tolerance" for guns on campus. Apparently that includes this shooting team and all its activities. The only trouble with "zero tolerance" policies is that they leave NO ROOM for an individual school official to use his/her own intelligence in dealing with such things. Maybe this school will change its policies if a student (or anybody else) comes into the school and kills a few people. Naaah! They'll probably just demand harsher "anti-gun" laws. They just refuse to understand that "no-gun zones" are an "engraved invitation" for criminals to come into their schools and kill people with impunity. (CCRKBA)

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Oughta Happen More Often

A burglar entered a home in Boulder County, Colorado (where self-defense is frowned upon) and got killed by the residents for his trouble. His own knife was taken from him and used to stab him to death while the woman hit him with a baseball bat. This kind of thing should happen more often, Maybe then, other burglars would go into other businesses.

Saturday, April 12, 2008

I Hate to Keep Repeating Myself

But nobody I ask seems able to understand me when I ask the same question over and over again: "What makes you think a CRIMINAL, whose entire life is dedicated to breaking the law, will OBEY a law that says he can't be armed? I once asked that question of the Denver mayor's (Wellington Webb) press hack and he accused me of "sending him spam." I asked him if he couldn't tell the difference between spam and personal correspondence, but got no answer.) In Philadelphia, the mayor thinks he can just ignore the state and make his own laws and criminals will obey them. In Washington, DC, they want to go into citizen's homes without warrants (asking "permission" and making them out to "have something to hide" if they refuse) to search for the guns the United States Constitution recognizes their RIGHT to own and use for self-protection. But notice when those cops bull their way in, what they're carrying on their hips; a GUN, naturally. It's strange that they must "enforce" unconstitutional laws against gun ownership with THEIR OWN GUNS! Governments that want to become dictatorial know they must first disarm the populace, so they won't be met with guns when they come to steal what's not theirs. What is it about this question that politicians just cannot understand? The better answer is simple: just make it a lot WORSE for a criminal if he is caught armed. That's a lot better than giving him a bigger bunch of unarmed victims. (SAF)

Thursday, April 10, 2008

DC Cops to Search Homes for Guns?

They want to come to your door and "politely ask" to search your home for guns, whether or not there is any enforceable law against them, and without a warrant. They do not tell you they'll "confiscate" (steal) any guns they find. " 'SAF (Second Amendment Foundation) founder Alan Gottlieb condemned the plan as a public relations effort designed to influence, through crass dramatics, Tuesday’s scheduled oral arguments on the constitutionality of the District’s handgun ban before the Supreme Court. Launching this effort on the eve of Supreme Court arguments over the city’s horribly failed handgun ban underscores the Draconian mentality that lies at the root of gun laws like the District handgun ban.' Arthur B. Spitzer with the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, D.C. was right when he told the Washington Post that this ‘sends a message to the public that the police ought to be able to search your house anytime for any reason’.” If you refuse, guess what? They'll find "probable cause" for a warrant in your refusal. They'll tell the judge, "If they had nothing to hide, why refuse?" Frankly, if they came to my door, I'd not only refuse, I'd tell them not to come back -- and I don't have a gun in my house, legal OR illegal -- yet. I don't want some "ham-handed cop" rifling through my private possessions ANY time, for ANY reason. (SAF)

Pull Out of Washington!

We have 160,000 troops in Iraq., and a total 0f 2112 deaths (as this is written). That's 60 per 100,000. The death rate in Washington, DC is 80.6 per 100,000. You're 25% more likely to be killed in Washington, DC (which has some of the strictest "gun-control" laws in the country) than in the war zone in Iraq. Conclusion? We should move our national capitol to Iraq and "pull out of Washington." The liberals make a lot of noise about Iraq casualties, but ignore those casualties in U. S. cities where the average person is not allowed to carry a gun for self-defense while criminals have no problem getting guns. The CCRKBA says we should all buy guns for self-protection. (CCRKBA)

Saturday, April 5, 2008

Releasing prisoners to "Save Money"

They apparently can't see the effect on prison populations of their policies of imprisoning the victims of the "drug scene. So they're going to release drug dealers and other criminals, some of them violent criminals. They also go out of their way to imprison people who get their own means of self-defense to defend themselves against these selfsame criminals, who have no trouble getting and carrying guns. They by them illegally on "the street" or just steal them. It amazes me how ignorant our politicians are on the WAY to solve our problems. They continue to adhere to their liberal notions that the way to self-defense is to DISARM honest people, rather than to enforce the "throw-away" laws already on the books to make crime worse if the criminal is armed. Instead, they regularly dismiss the "concealed weapons" charges if the criminal "cops a plea," But if they catch honest people carrying guns, they enforce the law to "the letter." The "Citizen's Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms" advises honest people to ignore those silly "anti-gun laws" and get their own guns with which to defend themselves. I don't blame them. If a criminal shoots me, I want it to be the last thing he does in his life. (CCRKBA)

"40-Hour Ban on Murder"

In Los Angeles, they want to "ban" murder for 40 hours! I always thought murder WAS banned, everywhere! Have you ever heard anything so incredibly stupid? Will they ALLOW murder after that 40 hours? This is the kind of incredibly stupid laws passed by liberals when they gain power in government (as they have in California). These are the same people who make laws against people carrying guns that only seem to apply to people who OBEY the law while criminals, who don't, remain armed and have a steady supply of unarmed victims. They don't know that laws against carrying guns, which criminals don't obey anyway, will NOT stop criminals from carrying their guns. Do they REALLY think a 40-hour ban on murder will stop, or even slow down, the murder rate in Los Angeles, or anywhere else? That illustrates, for me, the incredible stupidity of those people to waste the city's money and time to even CONSIDER such a thing. It amazes me that these people are even able to collect a salary while showing this kind of idiocy. (Los Angeles Times)