"Laws for Thee, Not for Me"

That’s the way it is on Chicago where rabidly anti-gun Mayor Rahm Emmanuel doesn’t want ANYBODY to be able to have guns to defend themselves against criminals (except him, of course). He still has a sign up outside his house falsely claiming Secret Service protection, although he no longer has it, since he is no longer on the president’s staff. Like most politicians who have 24 hour armed protection, they want to deny it to everybody else. Just having that protection shows they realize it’s necessary, but they still deny it for the rest of us. Some, like Sen. Diane Feinstein (a noted anti-gun fool) carries her OWN gun. One actress and comedienne I know of who is an ardent anti-gun fool also employs armed guards for her children. I think if you don’t believe others are entitled to have a gun for self-defense, you ought to go without, yourself. But not our politicians and other celebrities. They’re “better than the rest of us.” (Daily Caller)

Criminals' Big Mistake

Criminals are making a BIG mistake by “declaring war” on all cops. Yes, we know, most of those criminals have guns, and are willing to use them to kill as many cops as possible. And cops have to wear uniforms, with those shiny badges pinned right over their hearts. They’re “sitting ducks” for criminals bent on killing them. But so are the criminals. They don’t THINK a cop can spot them from a block away as an armed criminal, but they can. And now, with their heightened attention caused by the “war” declared upon them, they will now shoot quicker, and go in with guns drawn where before they would remain in their holsters. More criminals will die, just by REACHING for their illegally carried guns. Some without guns will die, too. Just because the cop THINKS he is armed. They have created a “self-fulfilling prophecy” that cops are too quick with their guns by threatening to kill them out of hand, and soon they WILL be quicker to shoot and kill them. Instead of REDUCING the chances of being killed by a quick-shooting cop, they have INCREASED the chances. Good luck, guys! (Just common sense)

Took Six Days

It took six days for the left to find a way to blame the NRA for the assassination of two cops in New York, completely ignoring all the “kill cops” rhetoric other leftists have been spreading like manure on a fallow field. They SAY firearm violence is way up because the NRA “wants every man to have a machine gun,” What a WHOPPER that is! Gun violence is way DOWN due to the NRA’s forcing more guns to be in the hands of HONEST people to oppose all the guns ILLEGALLY in the hands of CRIMINALS. This is the kind of LIE the left usually tells in their efforts to disarm ALL Americans (BUT criminals, who can always get their guns, a fact they ignore). It probably took them six days to find a way to twist the news to suit themselves. And the guy who wrote the article cited here is a college professor. Which shows us the fallacy of spending so much money to send our impressionable kids to their colleges to learn their LIES. (Down Trend)

Facebook Password Argument

The buyers of a bankrupt gun store demanded the password to the former owner’s Facebook account, saying that should be conveyed with the sale of the business. When he refused, they went to the law, and he spent seven hours in jail for contempt of court when he still refused. He said that, “The judge apparently didn’t understand the fine points of social media, since his Facebook account was his INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY, and not part of the business they bought.” I can’t help but agree with him, and I too, would go to jail rather than give ANYBODY my password to ANYTHING. I LOVE the saying he posted on his sign: “I like my guns like Obama likes his voters—undocumented.” That shows the strange kind of sense of humor I like. The judge is looking closely at the account, counting the number of business posts vs. the number of personal posts to determine the ownership of the account (the writers of the article got that all wrong). Frankly, I don’t think this judge has the power to dictate the ownership of the account. In any case, I’d advise this guy to tell his “friends” to “unfriend” him before the judge can make the decision he doesn’t have the right to make, but, like Obama, has just TAKEN.” (2ndAmendment Insider)

Stupid People

I can’t believe there are so many STUPID PEOPLE out there! And some of them are running newspapers! The Second Amendment is our BULWARK against this government making sure we (mostly) don’t have the means to oppose criminals (including the ones wearing badges) who come to steal what’s ours. Now a newspaper in Wisconsin (The Wisconsin Gazette) thinks we should “repeal that stupid Second Amendment.” And they have written an editorial to that effect. At least this author, one William T. Hastings, had the gonads to attach his name to his STUPID article. That’s unusual. They usually don’t. They hide behind anonymity when they make such STUPID thoughts public. I’ve always thought when somebody wanted to illustrate his IGNORANCE, stand by and let him. Which is why I am showing you this article. (Minuteman News)

Another Gun Maker Moves

Magpul (They don't make guns, per se. They make gun accessories, such as magazines), a company that had employed 200 people in Colorado, took out an ad telling Colorado they would move if the state passed the laws that made their products illegal in their own home state. So Colorado passed the laws, and Magpul is now moving it’s entire operation to Wyoming and Texas, taking their 200 jobs with them, as well as the business they “outsourced” to other Colorado firms. What’s WRONG with these people? (Politicians, not Magpul) It would be one thing if their laws weren’t USELESS in the “fight against gun violence” and didn’t just make it worse by DISARMING honest people and making them DEFENSELESS against armed CRIMINALS, who just get their guns ILLEGALLY, since they obey NO laws. But they ARE useless, and you’ll never convince these dunderheads of this. Their skulls are too thick. Their laws are unconstitutional, as well as being useless. But that’s another fact they will not accept. (Denver Business Journal)

Needs to Happen More

Two armed thugs knocked on her door and put a gun in her face when she answered. So she put her gun in the stomach of the one holding the gun and “blew him away.” What he didn’t know is that she grabbed her gun before going to the door. Viola! One less thug! The other guy is probably still running. Thugs everywhere should not know if their intended victims might be armed and able to “put them away.” Many crooks, being cowards, would re-examine their “career choice.” But the damned fools making all those useless “gun laws” won’t hear us when we talk about punishing USE of a gun in the commission of a crime, rather than disarm honest people and make them defenseless against armed criminals, who always get their guns, anyway, laws be damned. Maybe more gun grabbers need to be faced with a criminal’s gun. But they’re probably armed, anyway. They just don’t want US to be armed. (Opposing Views)

Banning the WORD "Gun"

Leave it to California to make landmark stupid gun laws ("t happens FIRST in California"). It is now illegal in California to display a gun, or even a sign containing the WORD gun that can be seen outside a gun store. In another place, cops were called over a gun TATTOO! Lefties seem to be trying to outdo themselves in making really STUPID gun laws—not just in California, although they “lead the pack” in making them. In yet another place, just visiting a psychiatrist can get your guns confiscated (stolen). Seattle billionaire anti-gun fool Nick Hanauer says, “We need more school shootings.” How stupid is THAT? Back in Chicago, yet another of their stupid gun laws has been shut down by the courts. These people amaze me! (World Net Daily)

"Gun-Free" Restaurant Robbed, Again

“Jack-In-The-Box” restaurants have put their stores “off limits” to gun carriers, thus inviting gun-toting crooks, who obey NO laws, and CERTAINLY no “requests” or “policies” of private businesses. They have become an “easy target” for armed robbers, and the crooks have been quick to take advantage of it. As in ALL “gun-free zones,” they now KNOW there’s scant chance honest people will be carrying a gun there, which makes it easier for them to rob them. Why these people can’t see that, and STOP designating “gun-free zones,” I don’t know. Maybe they’re just not too bright. You can’t get through the thick skulls of the gun grabbers on this so they must be “intelligence impaired.” Which is otherwise called, “stupid.” (World NetDaily)

Aussie Letter to Obama

In it, he noted that Obama “admired” the Australian gun laws, effectively BANNING the ownership and carrying of guns. He said the “success of the Australian gun ban” is a MYTH.” Just as Cuba’s having an excellent health care system is also a myth, engendered by lefties to support their “flights of fancy.” He rightly notes that the law “serves only to take guns away from law-abiding citizens while leaving only CRIMINALS in possession of guns, ” since they don’t obey ANY laws. He notes that “There are just as many guns on the streets today and gun violence has not “gone down” a whit—in fact, it has INCREASED. He further notes that today’s “gun laws” achieve little (except to make it easier for criminals to find unarmed victims). He says, “Civilian disarmament is based on the assumption that people are irresponsible (unless they work for the government). He says much more, but you’ll have to read his letter, linked below. (World NetDaily)

Lost His Bet

A criminal pointed his gun at a person in an effort to rob him and said, “I’ll bet you ain’t got one of these.” WRONG! He DID “have one of those,” and shot the crook, who is now awaiting trial after getting out of the hospital and is lucky to be alive. Had that potential victim been me, he’d be dead. And rightly so. The crook asked the man for a cigarette (that’s a usual dodge to put a victim at ease) and when he was told he had no cigarettes, he pulled his gun and made that smart-assed crack, getting himself shot. The shooter is NOT facing any charges. His gun was apparently legally held. My guess is, this criminal will seriously reconsider his line of “work.” Or at least be more careful in selecting his victims. (World Net Daily)

More Than Just Guns

The State of Connecticut imprisoned a weapons collector for having several weapons in his car during a move. Included in that collection was a “dirk” antique weapon and a police baton. He served fifteen months in prison while the case was being adjudicated, and was finally freed when the State Supreme Court determined carrying those knives and that baton was covered under the Second Amendment, as well as guns. So that document assures us of the right to carry more than guns. It specifically mentions “arms,” which includes knives, which many people don’t know. This man’s arrest, and imprisonment was caused by an over-reaching “police state” that apparently exists in the North East. The Second Amendment needs more clarification for those officious bureaucrats who wrongly enforce it, so as not to “put people’s lives on hold” while the courts straighten out their messes. This man’s life is severely affected by their action and the arrest and conviction will remain on his record forever, even if it is bogus. (World NetDaily)

No Posts Today

There will be no regular posts today or tomorrow, in honor of the Christmas holidays. The same will be true on New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day to observe that holiday. This will be true unless something terrible happens that needs to be reported right away, on those days. Otherwise, today, I wish all a MERRY CHRISTMAS! (None of that “Happy Holidays” stuff, here.)

NY Cop Killer A Criminal

The man who summarily murdered two cops has a long rap sheet,” and even spent some time in the slam for his crimes. What the hell was he doing in possession of the gun he used to kill those cops? Aren’t the tight gun laws supposed to keep guns out of the hands of such people? That’s what the anti-gun fools tell us all the time. I guess it’s not true, but you’ll never convince these fools they’re “barking up the wrong tree.” They think they’re smarter than the rest of us in spite of Sure proof they're NOT. They ridicule people who think honest people should be able to have their own guns to be able to defend themselves against criminals who always seem to be able to get their ILLEGAL guns. This guy had many felonies on his record, but he had a gun, anyway. This is further proof that today’s gun laws are USELESS to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but only give them an unending supply of UNARMED victims. By the way: this criminal was black and wearing a “hoodie.” Talk about stereotypes! (Mass Appeal News)

Is It Legal?

The ad posted by a “Hollywood Insider” suggested a child STEAL his parent’s gun and take it to school, both crimes, and give it to his teacher, asking her to cooperate in his crimes by “getting rid of it.” What kind of fool creates such an ad in the first place? Is it legal to make such an ad? Yes. Is it legal to suggest, to impressionable kids to commit at least TWO crimes? No. should this person be prosecuted for HER crime? Yes. There’s no telling how many children will be inspired by this ad to steal a gun from their parents and maybe, by accident, KILL somebody while taking it to school, since “gun-control advocates” have made it almost a crime to TEACH them how to handle a gun. That gun, which was an inanimate object until stolen, was NOW a “danger” when it was NOT, sitting in a drawer at home. Anti-gun nuts are fools, I know. But this takes the cake. (The Blaze)

Will It Show Things Down?

Not a chance! Thugs shooting cops from ambush will only make cops quicker to shoot when they run into somebody they even THINK may have a gun. And believe me, they KNOW. They can tell if you’re “carrying” just by the way you stand, and walk. They can SEE the “imprint” of a gun in your pocket. And no longer will you get the benefit of the doubt. If you make ANY move toward them, They’ll KILL you to keep you from killing THEM. Thugs of this type have no logic. And they don’t OBEY laws. Frankly, I’m afraid to walk around WITHOUT a gun. They don’t even know the MEANING of the word, logic. Liberals (many in elected or appointed office) don’t either. Some deny the EXISTENCE of logic. If this keeps up (and Obama and his thugs will see to it that it does), there is GOING to be a race war. He will keep whipping at it until it begins, then make his laws and regulations to further limit our freedoms and steal the money to finance it from us. There are far too many STUPID PEOPLE he can use for his own purposes. Some because they didn’t bother to gain an education, and others who just don’t pay attention to what their POLITICIANS are doing to them, by “hook or crook.” Others believe the LIES taught them by the criminals who are now college professors. And if you don’t believe Obama is the CHIEF CROOK, I feel sorry for you. I can’t help you. (ABC News)

Should I Run for President?

The question is not a silly one. I have just about as much chance as any of the ones now lining up to “go for it.” I’m 77, can barely walk, and can barely stay up later than nine of an evening, though I find it hard to stay asleep past 5 AM. I spend my days (and sometimes my nights, in my dreams) seeing how incompetent most of today’s politicians are. I pay enough attention that I know the real answers to most of the world’s problems, as most of those hopefuls don’t. I don’t think a LAW will stop criminals from getting guns. That’s just STUPID, but most of today’s politicians think so, even if some of them (not enough) don’t try and make such laws. I have no wish to kill anybody, though most presidents sometimes must. I DO want to kill ALL Islamic terrorists, not put them in prison and waterboard them. I just want to shoot them, on sight. That’s what they understand. Although I’m not interested in “gaining their understanding.” They have nothing to understand. They just want to kill EVERYBODY who doesn’t believe the way they think they ought to. That’s not going to change. It’s in their “Bible” (The Koran).

That leaves no room for discussion. I would lift ALL “environmental” laws, most of which are STUPID, and hurt our economy. I would lift all impediments to the operation of the coal industry as long as coal is the most important thing in the production of energy. Same for nuclear energy. Yes, there is a POSSIBILITY of a “nuclear disaster.” But there is the possibility of a disaster everywhere you look. And it CAN be, and HAS BEEN, made safe. We have had nuclear reactors in this country for years, and mostly no accidents. The nuclear accidents we have SEEN occurred in other countries, where safeguards are not so strict. I would throw oil production wide open as long as oil is the major source for power. I would NOT hinder it, in any way. That would be hard on the environment, you say? Not nearly as much as environmentalists would have you think. Same applies to global warming (whatever AlGore calls his con today).

Global warming has been proven to be false so many times, in so many ways, you’d have to be really STUPID to believe in it. I find the most damning proof in the fact that the “globe” has NOT been warming for many years; a fact ignored by the scammers, whose ranks include Barark Hussein Obama. Most of all, I would eliminate ALL laws and regulations that would lead us to collectivism (socialism). That is the stupidest part of the thinking of way too many people. There are many things today’s incompetent politicians do that I would NOT do; too many to mention, in fact. But finally, I would run things for the good of AMERICANS, not for myself. But I have NO chance of being elected; so all you people who pay no attention to politics (thinking politics will not pay attention to you) can relax. Rest assured I will not raise and spend millions of dollars to gain a job that only pays a couple of hundred thousand a year. That’s probably the silliest thing about most people who do. And anybody who does is not, in my opinion, smart enough to be qualified. Neither are those who wish to have the job. (Just common sense)

"Too Vague to Enforce"

Remember I-594? That onerous law in Washington State so many people have refused to obey, in spite of threats to jail them all (which, of course, would be impossible)? Well, it’s “too vague to enforce,” according to Lewis County’s new sheriff, Rob Snaza. ” Lewis County Prosecutor Jonathan Meyer said ‘The Lewis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office will not make criminals out of the hardworking citizens of Lewis County. Where I-594 attempts to criminalize every-day activities, I, in the exercise of my prosecutorial discretion, will not charge individuals with these types of violations’.” So the attempts by gun-grabbers in Washington State have made a real mess of it. Which is not surprising, since they aren’t too bright, or they’d see these kinds of laws make no difference, except to give criminals an unending supply of unarmed, easy victims.(Gun-Free Zone)

GOP Wins Gabby's Seat

Gabby Giffords was famously shot in the head and survived. She must, like most Democrat politicians, have a really hard head, though the bullet has obviously scrambled her brains. After recovering maybe), she resigned from Congress and spent millions to take guns away from HONEST people, which would not have made a bit of difference in her case. I don’t remember if the shooter was using a legal gun or not, but the kind of laws she espouses would not have stopped him from getting a gun, legally, or Illegally. Now a gun-favoring Republican has won her old seat in Congress, which will do more damage to her hopes than all the millions she can raise. Why such people try to take guns away from honest people is beyond me. Maybe they’re just stupid. Frankly, I’d be IN FAVOR of gun control” if it involved punishing the USE of guns in crimes, rather than just taking guns away from honest people and making them into easy targets for illegally armed criminals. (Gun Free Zone)

Sorry About Yesterday

My computer developed constipation as I was updating my blogs, so I couldn’t do anything with this one. I had to take it in for a “high colonic.” It was like taking a human to the hospital. I took it in and sat in the waiting room while they worked on it, waiting to see if it lived. It did, so here we are.

Shoot Burglars, Fewer Burglaries

Whoda thunkit? Shoot a few burglars and the number of burglaries go down. Surprise, surprise! Anti-gun fools say it isn’t so. But it is. Just as shooting more violent criminals makes for fewer violent crimes. Not because more criminals are killed, but because other criminals go into other lines of work. Anti-gun fools deny that, too. But reality is intruding faster and faster on the world of “anti-gun fantasy.” Soon, they’re not going to be able to deny it. But they will. People keep missing the point as reporters write things like, “Crime Drops In Spite of More People In Prison.” The headline should be “Crime Drops BECAUSE of More People In Prison.” A classic example of “a missed point” is this line from one article: “The number of inmates in state and federal prisons rose 2.1 percent last year, even as violent crime and property crime fell, according to a study by the Justice Department released yesterday.” They just can’t believe maybe prison population is increasing BECAUSE more criminals are in prison and others are re-evaluating their career choice. (TheTruth About Guns)

Change Poll Questions

The Huffington Post thinks pollsters should change their poll questions so as to get the answers they WANTED, rather than the truth, as “Everytown Against Gun Violence” (or some such) has done, which is why they always get answers they like. They understand that you can control the results you get in ANY poll by the questions you ask. Apparently they know that mostly only liberals read that rag so we probably won’t read this article and be “onto them.” They’re wrong. Some people read their stuff so they can know what the enemy” is saying. And, in this case, it has paid off. It’s not often they so openly talk about their usual methods and recommend that HONEST pollsters adopt them. (Breitbart)

Australia's Gun Ban

What? Australia has a gun ban? Then how did that Islamic terrorist “lone wolf” who held people hostage and killed some of them get his guns? I thought making LAWS against gun ownership would keep people like that from getting their guns! You mean it doesn’t? People bent on multiple murder don’t CARE about piddling things like laws that say they can’t be armed? Wow! Is REALITY intruding on Australia’s effective gun ban? The former mayor of Sydney is now advising the government to LIFT that “gun ban” and let Australians defend themselves. There’s one politician that is beginning to “see the light.” He understands what Admiral Yamamoto understood when he said the Japanese should not attack the American mainland in WWII because “There would be a gun behind every blade of grass.” He understood the concept of safety being insured by an ARMED POPULACE that today’s politicians in America just don’t understand, to their detriment. (Breitbart)

Press Ignores Poll

CBS devoted 18 SECONDS to a recent poll that showed Americans were more IN FAVOR of “gun safety,” rather than “gun control” as it is known, today. ABC and NBC ignored it, altogether, as they usually do when reality intrudes upon their preconceived notions and does not conform to their agenda. The poll showed that 52% now favor “gun rights” and 46% “gun control.” That apparently didn’t sit well with ABC AND NBC so they ignored it. CBS anchor Charlie Rose noted that, for the first time in two decades, more Americans favored gun rights than gun control. This, amid a controversy over two cop killings of unarmed black men. ABC and NBC gave a significant amount of time to Golden globe recipients and other inconsequential stuff like McDonald's changing its menu. (News Busters)

"Everytown" Falsifies Figures

We all knew they do, but the proof is now in. They’ve published a list of school shootings that includes shootings in neighborhoods CLOSE to schools, but not in schools, themselves. This allows them to “pad” their figures and make things look worse than they really are. But that’s no surprise. People who pay attention have always known it. Their list was supposedly “100 School Shootings Since Sandy Hook,” but included shootings NEAR schools, shootings that did not even happen, accidental gun discharged of LEGAL guns on, or near school property. Even so, “news” outlets like Huffington Post, and people like Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign, bought the list, hook, line, and sinker. This is how they inflate their figures and make things look like they’re much worse than they are. Then they go out and beg for money, based on these phony figures--and they get it. They know where the people who have an irrational fear of guns are. (Breitbart)

Funny Gun Holster

A woman was being booked for driving without a license in Kingsport, TN, when a small North American Arms 5-shot revolver was found—in her vagina. And it was loaded. Any guy getting fresh with her better be very careful. He could get shot. The gun was found to have been stolen in an auto burglary in 2013. They didn’t give the 70-year-old owner details on where it was found, when they informed him of its finding. 19-year-old Dallas Archer was arrested on additional charges of carrying a concealed weapon. While the place it was carried was unusual, it was sufficient for the charges. She had better be very careful in drawing it. That would be a really strange place to get shot. I have to write about many bad things. It’s nice to be able to write about this story for a little levity. (The SmokingGun)

Texas for Open Carry

Texas is moving rapidly toward legalizing the open carry of guns without a license requirement. And in Texas, more than any other state, it’s possible they will get it, with their “Western history.” Yes, other states also have a “Western history,” but none as strong as Texas. For instance, you don’t hear anybody saying, “Don’t mess with Colorado!” Yes, Colorado has a “Western heritage,” but not as strong as Texas, and it DOES still have an anti-gun DEMOCRAT governor, who won in spite of the Republican landslide in 2014. Though his chances in the NEXT election are slim. It’s nothing new to see a Texan with his high-crowned, ten-gallon hat and low-slung gun and holster. They’ve always had a colorful gun history. With the passage of this law, it will continue and increase, and, contrary to the opinion of gun-grabbers, violent crime will go down. They can’t deny such numbers, so they simply ignore them. (Houston Chronicle)

Gun Grabbers Have No Imagination

Terry McAuliffe, former Democrat Party Chair, and current Virginia Governor, is virulently anti-gun. But he has no new ideas, at all. He just announced several new anti-gun measures, including expanded background checks, and limits on how many guns a person can buy in a month. That one was passed by a previous governor, but repealed by a subsequent Republican governor. Now he’s reviving it. He says the gun buying limit will “prevent criminals from ‘stockpiling’ guns.”  It won’t, since all they have to do is buy them illegally, since they don’t obey laws. Nothing about making it a more serious crime if a gun is used, or any pother measure punishing the USE of guns in crime. Democrats always come up with these tired, old ways they HOPE will “curb gun violence,” while gun violence predictably (to people of intelligence, at least) continues to rise. They know their ideas don’t work, from experience. But they keep making laws that never work, saying they’re “doing something” about gun violence. They aren’t, but you can’t convince them of that. Logic is foreign to them, as is intelligence. (Washington Post)

"NRA Doesn't Care"

According to anti-gun freaks "the NRA does not care a whit about gun violence.” What a STUPID thing to say about the main organization that DOES “give a damn” about gun safety and goes out of its way to provide it. "In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut in 2012, Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said, 'The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.' The Brady Campaign counters that in order to curb gun violence, we must 'stop the guy from getting a gun in the first place'." And how do you do that? You’ve been trying, and FAILING at that for years. No matter how tight you make your gun laws, somehow crooks and crazies still manage to get their guns. You need to open your eyes to reality and start thinking about how to handle that fact so as to make it more difficult for a criminal to GET a gun illegally or be punished more severely if he USES one in the commission of  crime. Punish USE of a gun in a criminal fashion, not OWNING a gun for honest people. All that does is give the ILLEGALLY armed criminal a steady supply of UNARMED victims and KILLS people. (Huffington Post)

Alaska Has the Right Idea

Alaska is the nearest thing to the frontier we have left in this country. And they certainly have the right idea when they start a class to teach teenage girls how to shoot guns. Maybe it’s the “frontier thinking.” “Teens On Target” is a course that teaches teen girls (why not boys, too?) basic gun safety and armed self-defense. Looks like they know the right way to deal with those “two-legged varmints” who prey on young girls. Like people in the “big city” don’t know about. He originator of the course says he started it because girls seem to be more intimidated by guns than were boys. He’s hoping “Moms Against Guns” (or something like that) have a sh-t fit about it, so his course will get even more publicity. They probably will, as soon as they hear about it. Politicians in most areas are motivated by an “irrational FEAR” of guns. They think that if people get used to having guns around, they’ll start shooting everything up. (The Truth About Guns)

Reducing Gun Violence

By collecting TOY guns. Yes, you read that right. In Cleveland, Ohio, community activists are joining forces to curb gun violence—by collecting TOY guns. And I thought I had seen the heights of stupidity in previous anti-gun actions. Actions like suspending children from school for chewing a Pop Tart into the general SHAPE of a gun. Or pointing a finger and hollering, BANG! Or drawing a PICTURE of a gun. But this tops ‘em all. A cop shooting a 12-year-old boy, thinking he was holding a real gun sparked the “toy gun buyback,” but I think it’s aimed in the wrong direction. Some COPS need to have their guns removed because they seem to have no common sense about when to shoot, and at whom. You’d think people would be smart enough to know that things like this will do NOTHING to “curb gun violence.” But, NO! They keep doing the same lame things over and over again in hopes that THIS TIME, it will work; and it doesn’t. So they do it again. (Fox 8)

Losing More Than Guns

New York’s latest stupid gun law, the “Safe Act,” has caused the loss of more than just guns in New York. It has cost Ilion, NY, 125 jobs that have gone to Alabama as Remington Arms closes it’s Ilion plant and moves South to a state that’s a “little more friendly to gun makers.” Part of the “Safe Act,” which was hurriedly passed in the wake of the Newtown, CT school shooting, effectively BANS the AR-15, which Remington makes (While doing NOTHING to stop criminals from getting their guns). Leah Gunn Barrett, of “Mothers Against Guns (or something like that) attributes it to market conditions in New York. Yeah, of COURSE, banning their main product in their own home state had NOTHING to do with it. This woman, has demonstrated her STUPIDITY again and again, but stupid people do that on a regular basis. She says further, “(Critics) love to use the New York SAFE Act as a whipping boy, but let’s face it, that law is keeping New Yorkers safe and keeping New York communities safe and our kids safe and guns out of the wrong hands, to me that’s more important.” Typically, she offers NO proof to back up her statement, but then, that’s how these fools operate. (The Right to Bear)

More Race War News

Ferguson, MO, is right now the best place to promote Obama’s wish for a race war. The bosses of the liberal media are working HARD to create division there as a catalyst for racial division everywhere. What they don’t report is a story about four BLACK men who are protecting a gas station owned by a WHITE man. That would negate their agenda. They “ran off” the “Oath Keepers” who were doing the same thing because most of them were white. But black men having guns is okay, because they can build a story on that. The Second Amendment is INTENDED for things like this, but the liberal media is bent on painting a completely different picture. One in which whites hate blacks, blacks hate whites. And “never the twain should meet.” What they want is “riots in the streets” all over America, and they’re beginning to get it (We had a small riot in Denver over this the other day during which four cops were run over by a car). When it gets worse, some people will start insisting the government “do something about it,” and the government will be very willing to do so. They will start making more and more limiting rules, regulations, and LAWS to inhibit private use of guns, and they will get PASSED, unlike before. Can ANYBODY see this who will DO something about it? (The Right to Bear)

Owning Guns Dangerous?

That’s the tune gun grabbers sing. But that’s based on the erroneous idea that gun owners are all INCOMPETENT to handle their guns—which is a LIE. Of course, that makes no difference to them. Facts don’t matter to them. But the interesting thing is that more people now favor gun RIGHTS over those misguided souls that favor the kind of anti-gun laws now being made, and that irritates them, no end. And they deny it with spittle spraying from their mouths. ANYTHING that negates their preconceived notions makes them crazy. But that’s what we’re up against, so we’re used to it. That’s why they’re so easy to whip. (Politico)

"Voluntarily" Let Them Search

It’s shame, but there is no shortage of potential dictators. Some politicians just want to “shut up” people with whom they disagree. A good example is the Wisconsin police chief who wants people to “voluntarily” have their homes searched for guns. Is it “voluntary” if you do something under threat of being forced if you don’t? Then there are those who want to “deem” 270 some gun owners in one state “mentally deficient” and “confiscate” (steal) their guns. This would be unlawful, but they don’t care. They’re “in power” and will extend the limits of that power until (or unless) stopped. Frankly, if a cop showed up at my door demanding for me to “voluntarily” let him search my house for guns, I’d tell him to “voluntarily” go to hell and slam the door ON his face. Until the LAW says he can, he doesn’t get to EVER search property of which I am in control. Even if they WERE allowed to search my property, if they found any guns that are legal, they’re not legally allowed to touch them. (Last Resistance)

Fair Bans Guns: Fair Robbed

It’s no surprise, at all (to intelligent people), that when the North Carolina State Fair banned guns, that immediately somebody at the fair would be robbed at gunpoint. I guess the “bad guys” didn’t care abut the judge’s order that no guns should be present on the fairgrounds. Criminals never do. Which WE know, but which the anti-gun fools do NOT. This story notes that the criminals were probably emboldened by knowing the people at the fair would likely not be armed (They’re pretty good at noting the obvious). Frankly, I’d advise fairgoers NOT to attend the fair until this policy is changed, which, with today’s ignorant politicians, it will not be. This policy is in violation of the law, but state officials don’t care. The judge issuing the ruling banning guns from the fairgrounds says, “This area of the law is a quagmire.” But only in the minds of simpletons who can’t understand a simple paragraph like the Second Amendment, which is very plain and short. The right to be armed "shall NOT be infringed." (The Right to Bear)

"Mentally Unstable"

The State of New York is going to “deem” 278 gun owners as “mentally unstable” so they can confiscate their guns. Remember when the Soviet Union declared many of their “enemies” as insane and put them in asylums? Therefore not having to prove them to be criminals, but simply mentally deficient (in somebody's OPINION) and thus shutting them up. Now it’s happening here. They did it by cross-referencing gun owners with names on a database list of “mentally deficient people.” Which, of course, it can appear on those lists whenever somebody has an OPINION that they’re mentally deficient. No legal system is required to get on such a list, and it’s almost impossible to be removed, once there. They say, “It takes only one person to wreak havoc and tragedy if they have access to a firearm.” One problem with that: they DO “have access” to a firearm, ILLEGALLY, if they want to. Declaring them insane isn’t going to stop them from getting a gun if they really want it. Laws and regulations never do. But it WILL allow them to confiscate many guns, based on somebody’s OPINION. (Fox News)

Di Fi "Investigated," and Boy, Is She Mad!

Republicans recently investigated Diane Feinstein and some other anti-gun fools. This pissed them off, so they started the “investigation” of the CIA’s treatment of those mass murderers in GITMO. They came up with a few liberals who told them we really “hurt” these guys, and it was unfair! But their findings were completely wrong. They didn't even bother to talk to people personally involved. This “enhanced interrogation,” did not even rise to the level of torture (except in the fevered brains of the investigators) and DID lead to some spectacular victories over the Islamic terrorists. Unfortunately, they can’t reveal anything about most of them without revealing things better kept secret. So the liberals have a field day trashing them without response. This is how they work. Investigate their “enemies,” come up with some phony results, publicize those results, and DARE their target to refute them. Which, of course, they can’t, because that would require revealing secrets. (Real Clear Politics)

More Proof

You don’t need a gun in a restaurant—until you do. Again, an armed citizen who happened to be there when a criminal “threw down” on the employees of a Red Lobster restaurant (the article doesn’t say where) made all the difference. The armed customer was TRYING to flee the scene, but he was confronted by the robber in the parking lot, who was carrying the cash drawer. The customer pulled his gun and fired a shot, missing the robber, but scaring the hell out of him. He dropped the cash drawer and “ran for the hills.” Further proof that ONE PERSON with his own legal gun can stop a robber in his tracks. But the anti-gun fools continue to LIE and say that never happens, ignoring reality. This is indicative of their honesty—or lack thereof. When will they ever learn? Probably never. Facts mean nothing to them. Only their preconceived notions. Wait a minute! Isn’t Red Lobster one of those outfits that bans guns from their property? Didn’t anybody tell this robber? Good thing they didn’t tell that customer. (All Outdoor)

Well. It Worked In Ferguson

The family of robber Juventino Bermudez Arenas is claiming that he “had his hands up” and was trying to surrender to police at a McMinnville, Oregon 7/11 after he had stabbed a student to death inside. I guess he just didn’t want to die, if it’s true. But I have my serious doubts it IS true. They’re just trying to “muddy the waters” after cops “filled him full of lead.” I don’t have much sympathy for this murderer, or ANY murderer. Families of criminals are FAMOUS for claiming their criminal relatives are just “innocent little guys” who were trying to surrender, as they did in Ferguson, which has proven to be a lie. He DID leave and come back, which family members say shows he wanted to turn himself in. But returning with a knife in his hand and advancing on the officers is NOT indicative of someone who wants to turn himself in. They told him to drop it. He refused. Cops shot him before he could stab any of them. Yes, his hands WERE up. Holding a knife and threatening cops. (Bearing Arms)

The Hidden Audiotape

The Grand Jury in Ferguson heard an audiotape of the Mike Brown shooting that proved, incontrovertibly that Brown was ATTACKING the cop when he was shot. That tape was not among the things released after the decision. Not that it would have made any difference to the criminals running the riots. They SAID as much when they told the press that it didn’t make any difference whether or not the cop was indicted for his “crime.” There were going to be riots, anyway. Why is that? Because they want some more chances to loot stores over this “made-up crisis.” Chicago Mayor (and former Obama chief of staff) Rahm Emmanuel infamously said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste,” and they didn’t intend to. That audiotape gave proof positive of the TIMING of the shots, and convinced the jurors the cop was innocent of any wrongdoing while shooting in self-defense. Why the cops didn’t release it, I don’t know. I also don’t know why they “ran off” the “Oath Keepers,” who were there to DEFEND store owners plagued by out of control looters. Maybe they WANTED more riots. I don’t know. I can’t fathom the actions of some politicians, at all. This was reported by the Washington Post, which is NOT a conservative outlet. (Washington Post)

Criminals Prefer Unarmed Victims

They LOVE tight gun laws, because that means they can be pretty sure their intended victims will not be armed, and thus will be defenseless against their ILLEGALLY-carried guns. They also love “no-gun zones,” for the same reason. They know that means even “concealed carry license holders” will not be able to carry their guns there (if they obey laws, that is). That was so recently at a Kroger Store in Atlanta as three armed men walked up to another man and shot him with no words spoken. What’s the matter with them? Don’t they know it’s against store policy to bring guns onto their property? Oh; I forgot. They had a much worse crime in mind, so who worry about a silly store policy? Hey, “Moms Against Guns (or whatever),” THIS guy needed a gun to go grocery shopping!” More proof that the policies of the gun grabbers don’t work. (Daily Caller)

Recognizing Reality

Politicians in some places are smarter than others. We’ve been waiting a long time for OUR politicians to realize that more HONEST PEOPLE with guns can definitely make a difference in violent crime by making criminals “nervous” about the possibility that their intended victims will be armed, and well able to KILL them when they attack them, or just by KILLING them. But they’re not showing any possibility of that. In Israel, however, it’s a different story. After the slaughter of four worshippers and a cop in a synagogue, they further reduced the strength of their laws about concealed carry and licensing to carry a gun. “They need to strengthen the security of their people” as they “fight terrorists,” who seem to have no trouble getting their guns. That sounds like here, but just replace “terrorists” with “armed criminals.” As I’ve said before, one of my favorite pictures is of an Israeli woman standing over a terrorist on the ground, pumping bullets into his brain. I’d like to see more of that here with our violent criminals. You say we don’t have terrorists here? Just wait. Obama is working on it. (Daily Caller)

Going "Executive Order" Crazy

That pretty much describes Obama’s actions. He has issued more overreaching executive orders than any other president in history, and to cover more things than executive orders were ever meant to do. He has twisted the meaning of the executive order, which was DESIGNED only to affect ONLY the actions of federal employees at their work. Now he’s using them to order federal employees to oppress the populace by doing things they have no LEGAL right to do, but which they get away with under “color of laws” that do not exist I expect he will next use one to limit our right to self defense and the right to own and carry the means to that, a gun (something he has tried, many times to do under law, but was prevented by the Constitution). I hesitate to mention that, because I don’t want to give him any ideas. But I suspect he’s already thought of it. Look for it to happen and be prepared to fight it (Just common sense)

Proved It Again

Once again, events have proven that ONE MAN with his own gun and the willingness to use it, can stop a criminal in his tracks. In Las Vegas, an armed man came into a Red Lobster and tried to rob it. He tried to take the entire cash drawer, but dropped it when a customer took out his own gun and fired a shot into the air. The altercation occurred in the parking lot where the robber, holding the cash drawer while attempting to flee, confronted the customer, not knowing he was armed. He fled without the cash drawer but was apprehended just up the street. One would think the gun grabbers would change their story that armed people cannot stop criminals, but they won’t. To them, facts don’t matter. They will continue to insist that armed citizens CANNOT stop a criminal from doing his dastardly deeds, in spite of the evidence to the contrary. (KTNV News)

Seen This In the Media?

Not likely. The myth the media is pushing (at the behest of Obama, who WANTS a ”race war”) is that nobody is prosecuting cops who shoot unarmed black people illegally. This happened in south Carolina, which has had a bad reputation for treatment of blacks in earlier years. The black man in this case was protesting the treatment of his daughter by this cop and, after arguing with the cop, tried to drive off. A scuffle ensued, and the cop shot and killed him. Over a TRAFFIC VIOLATION. The cop has been indicted, but you’ll never hear about it, except in the LOCAL media and in the “alternative media.” Maybe the cop was justified in this case, maybe he wasn’t. But at least, it will be decided in a court of law, with both sides presenting their side. Unlike in Ferguson, MO, where that will not happen. But that doesn’t give the thugs there the right to riot, and steal from local businesspeople. But they’re simply using this situation as an EXCUSE to go wild and steal and destroy things. (Fox News)

Making Guns Available

It’s a “revolutionary concept” in today’s “anti-gun atmosphere,” but the School Board in Logan County, Ohio, has become the second batch of school “authorities” in Ohio to “make guns available” to teachers and staff that can be used in case of a “mass shooter” coming into their school. This is move in the right direction, but TRAINING those people in how to USE those guns is not mentioned. I’d hate to think of a bunch of teachers who don’t know which end of a gun the bullet comes out of flinging bullets in all directions and hitting NOTHING they aim out, and possibly hitting students or other staff. They SAY they’re going to be doing “intensive training,” but what does that mean? Give a politician a choice of two solutions to a problem, and he/she will always choose the one that costs the most money so he can “siphon off” some of it. Simply ALLOWING teachers and staff who are concealed carry permit holders to bring their guns to school would cost them NOTHING, so they go “halfway there,” and claim to be “solving the problem.” (The Right to Bear)

Ferguson Racism

They insist that racism is the cause of the problems in Ferguson, MO. And they’re right, but not in the way they want you to think. It is NOT that old, “whites hating blacks” racism of the old days. It’s BLACKS hating WHITES, and they are very vocal about it. They think they are ENTITLED by the actions of your ANCESTORS. Yes, there are a few white fools rioting in Ferguson, but most of them are BLACKS (Not “African-American, That’s a phony label they put out do they can control our speech.). Recently FOUR BLACK MEN (led by a REAL “gentle giant”) were seen in a brightly lit gas station. One was put in handcuffs by the cops before the gas station owner came out and told them he was one of his “protectors.” But this is so unusual as to make news, where black people with guns are USUALLY the rioters and looters. They said, “This guy is our friend, and we will protect him.” This again proves that a few honest people with their own guns can put a crimp in the depredations of others, black or white. (The Right to Bear)

"Cops Want to Hurt You"

New York Mayor, well known socialist DiBlazio just “threw his cops under the bus” when he told reporters he warned his kids, who are PROTECTED by his cops, to be AFRAID of the cops. After that black guy was accidentally killed by an overzealous white cop (and his buddies) he told them he was requiring his cops to attend THREE DAYS of “conditioning” to get them to “adjust to the thugs” and stop hassling them so much over small things. It doesn’t matter that Giuliani brought the New York crime rate to record lows by STARTING to enforce “small things” to get them used to the fact that the cops would ‘”come down on them HARD” if they got out of line. They got the message and crime went down. He didn’t do it by creating unconstitutional gun laws, he just “gave them a message” that his cops weren’t going to be as “easy” as they had been. (Just common sense)

Not Just "Rednecks"

Liberals want you to think anti-gun control people are just “rednecks” who drive around in pickup trucks with rifles hanging in the back window, so imagine their surprise when “Ice-T,” a well known rap figure and television actor says they’re wrong. And then a well known member of the Asian race tells us “chapter and verse” why today’s gun laws are AGAINST the law and reminds us why certain Asian store owners did not have their stores trashed in the LA riots because they had GUNS and used them for self-protection. They try their best to ignore these people and others like them, “red necks” not at all. You don’t have to be a “red neck” to value your right to self-defense and the ownership and use of the MEANS to that, a gun. One of these days, these fools may “get wise” to reality, but I doubt it. They aren’t smart enough. We will be fighting their efforts to violate the Constitution for the next hundred years, or more, as they ”brainwash” youngsters to their lies. (Tea Party Bulletin)

States BAN Gun Laws

States are taking action to bar the feds from enforcing their stupid, irresponsible gun laws. “All across the United States, legislators who believe in the sanctity of Second Amendment rights are rising up, introducing and passing state laws to thwart attempts by the federal government to impose gun control. More than 200 such bills have been introduced in the past ten years, according to an investigation by News21, which reports: A News21 analysis shows 14 such bills were passed by legislators in 11 states, mainly in Western states, along with Kansas, Tennessee and Alaska. Of those, 11 were signed into law, though one was later struck down in court. In Montana, Missouri and Oklahoma, three others were vetoed.” I don’t know if passing local laws to PREVENT the feds from enforcing dumb laws is unprecedented, or not. I DO know it is unusual. But it is the right thing to do when the feds “go wild” and make unconstitutional laws (Second Amendment Insider)

"Lap Dogs?" Get REAL!

The Brady campaign has come up with one of the stupidest campaign videos I’ve ever seen. But then, what can you expect from stupid people? That bullet must have done something to Gabby’s brain to approve such a jerkwater video. Frankly, I think the “lapdog politicians” are on the anti-gun side. They can’t all be so stupid as to believe that crap that laws keeping guns out of the hands of HONEST people will keep them out of the hands of CRIMINALS, who obey NO laws. Gabby is a pretty blond, and you know about pretty blonds. Not you, of course, just those DEMOCRAT pretty blonds. I’m kidding, of course. There’s only ONE “pretty blond” I think is that stupid, and that’s because she has had her brain scrambled. I can’t believe they really believe making LAWS will stop criminals from getting their guns. And that keeping LISTS of gun owners will do so. (Second Amendment Insider)

Another Way Around Constitution

A coalition of police departments, municipalities, and clergymen is forming to pressure lawmakers to pass laws to make ALL guns that don’t have “Smart Gun” technology illegal. Which, of course, serves to ban almost ALL guns as a "side issue." They argue that this does not violate the Constitution, since it does not ban ALL guns. But think about it; people who own guns will find them owning ILLEGAL guns if such laws ever get made. It’s a sneaky way to “get around” the constitutional restrictions on banning guns while effectively banning most guns in existence, and forcing people who need guns to buy new ones with all the built-in difficulties to go through. (The Blaze)

They Just Don't Learn

The gun grabbers have to know that more guns in the hands of honest people is a good thing, but they resist it with every fiber of their being. Gabby Giffords, who herself was almost killed by the owner of an ILLEGAL gun, says her anti-gun fool organization will “put pressure on” to pass more and more of the useless kind of “gun laws” she has espoused in the past. She just don’t get it that her kind of law will NOT stop criminals from buying their guns from other criminals in a back alley somewhere. That criminals will ALWAYS be able to get their guns, and the ONLY answer is more guns in the hands of the “good guys” to oppose them. But they never learn. They’re fixated on removing guns completely from the world, which they’ll never be able to do. But they’re determined to try, even if it KILLS many people. (Politico)

Gun Ownership In Medical Files?

Doctors are already asking patients about their ownership of guns—which is a violation of their civil rights. But now they want that information to be an integral part of their medical files. They don’t understand that their patients can tell them to “mind their own dambed business” when they ask. And if the doctor threatens to drop them as patients, so be it. There ARE still lots of doctors out there who don’t ask this question (yet), and if they do, it’s the patient’s right to LIE. Now, in the UK, they want to force doctors to “fink” on their patients if they “think” their gun ownership might be a danger to themselves or anyone else, with the proviso that even if they don’t believe it, they MUST report it if the possibility exists, or be penalized. Just as, in this country, they are FORCED to do the same if there is ANY indication that a child might be being abused—even if they don’t believe it, themselves; or be punished. That’s how the government inserts itself into our private lives. (NRA/ILA)

Bad News for Gun Grabbers

They talk incessantly about violent crime and try to convince us it is “out of control.” But the truth is a little different (as usual). “From 2012 to 2013, the nation’s murder rate decreased five percent, to at least a 57-year low. The 2013 rate was down 56 percent from the all-time high recorded in 1980, and down 54 percent since 1991, when total violent crime hit an all-time high.” Hmmm…1980. Wasn’t that when conservatives began running the government? Why is it that when the liberals aren’t running things, things get better, and when liberals are running things, they get worse? In any case, that’s “bad news for gun-grabbers.” More bad news is that this rate may be the lowest in American history. Kinda puts their “take” in question, doesn’t it? They say “gun violence is getting worse. “While Americans acquired between 135-140 million new firearms from the end of 1991 through the end of 2013, the nation’s violent crime rate decreased in 19 of those 22 years.” Does that sound like it’s getting worse? (Daily Caller)

Typical Liberal Reaction

When told that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens that will leave them defenseless against illegal gun-wielding criminals, he said, “That’s a chance worth taking.” Yeah, right. It's "risk worth taking" for HIM, while he makes the decision for others. Apparently one of the top gun-grabbers, Senator Diane Feinstein doesn’t agree, since she carries a gun. “It’s a chance worth taking” for WHOM? Somebody else, of course; liberals make laws for OTHER PEOPLE, not themselves. The writer of a piece in the Tallahassee Democrat says, “If we ban guns, criminals will soon not be able to get their guns.” How STUPID is that? The more we banned liquor during prohibition, the more liquor there was out there. The same will apply to guns. When it becomes illegal, that alone creates an illicit market for it, and criminals JUMP to fill it. Which makes the problem WORSE, not better. This statement shows the complete IGNORANCE of this writer about reality. The idea that a law banning guns will eventually lead to guns disappearing is complete IGNORANCE and it is only due to liberal editors that this writers' drivel got into print. (Breitbart)

Gun Buys "Test" System

According to the FBI, guns are being sold so fast, they can’t keep up with registering them. The NICS is getting at least TWO requests for background checks a SECOND (I read somewhere it was THREE a second), and consequently, many gun purchases are “slipping through” the system, due to the “rush.” They think this is bad. They think things like this can STOP “gun violence.” When are they going to get it through their thick skulls that gun registration only gives them a way to trace ownership of a gun AFTER somebody has committed a crime using it? But then, that’s all they have. They can’t just BAN guns. So they make it as hard as possible to buy one and own it. One of the biggest problems they have is the STATES “falling down on the job” of updating records of insanity and other reasons for not allowing the purchase. They only send the information voluntarily, and often do not keep up. Researcher Valerie Sargo said, “It makes you feel good when this person is not supposed to have a handgun and you can keep it out of his hands.”  Yeah, right. So he goes into a back alley somewhere and buys it out of the car trunk of another criminal—and then he has a gun nobody knows about—except his intended victim, who is unarmed because of short-sighted laws. (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

"Getting Around" the Constitution

Gun grabbers work HARD to “get around” the Constitution on gun control. Most of them know they can’t just make a law to BAN guns altogether, although that’s what they’d LIKE to do. So they make laws to HINDER people in their use and make them useless. Like making people “register” when they buy ammunition, or ban ITS manufacture or ownership “It’s not a gun, huh? Therefore, it’s not covered by the Second Amendment. But if you don’t have ammunition, your gun is a good doorstop, right? Now the Los Angeles Council wants to make an ordinance to force gun owners to DISABLE or “lock up” their guns, which also is not unconstitutional, but has the same effect. We need to “register” or “disable” the politicians who want to do this. Better, let’s just not elect them, in the first place; or DE-elect them if they ARE elected. (LA Times)

How Can This Happen?

Chicago has some of the tightest anti-gun laws going. So tough, in fact, that one of them was recently reversed by the Court. I thought such laws were supposed to make such things a distant memory. All anti-gun fools say so, so it must be true. But apparently, it’s not. Just ask the woman whose boyfriend shot her to death in a Nordstrom’s Store in Chicago recently. Oh; I forgot. You can’t; she’s dead. Maybe somebody should have told her boyfriend it was illegal to have a gun in Chicago. Oh yeah; it’s also illegal to KILL someone, anywhere. Apparently he doesn’t give a damn about a trivial little law against carrying a gun because he was bent on violating a much more serious law against MURDER. Do you think these fools will ever learn that? Doubtful. They’re not too smart. (ABC News)

"Who Needs A Gun?

A question often asked by anti-gun fools is, “Who needs a gun in a bar?” Of course, the answer is simple, but the gun-grabbers aren’t smart enough to figure it out for themselves: Somebody might come into that bar to rob people and having your own gun can put a stop to it. That’s what happened, here, and nobody else was armed, so nobody could stop the shooter. If there had been ONE person with his own gun in that bar, watching football with the others, he would have been able to put a stop to the robbery. But under usual current laws, a bar is especially considered a place where guns should not be allowed. I say, if they were allowed, even a drunk could not terrorize the bar, because someone else would likely be there with his own gun and be able to stop it. (WOWKTV)

Facebook Bans Gun Safety

They stopped a gun store from advertising a gun safety class “because it linked back to a place that sold guns.” In their message about it, it said, “This decision is final. Please consider this the final message about your ad.” In other words, they’re KING, and there’s no chance of appeal of their decision. Don't ask. Maybe that gun store should just close their Facebook account and tell them to “go to hell.” That’s what I’d do if something like that happened to me. They need ME. I don’t need THEM. They think they’re “big stuff” who can make their own rules, contrary to common sense. Policies and actions like this will be the “death of them” as more and more people close their accounts because of it. Fortunately, Facebook is not the government, and you can still talk about guns and share photos of them on Facebook—until they decide, in their infinite wisdom, not to allow it. Just don’t try and publish an AD there with ANY connection to guns, no matter how thin. Their stupidity knows no bounds. But then, they’re liberals. What else can you expect? (The Right to Bear)

"Outfoxing" the Feds

Eleven states are “outfoximg the feds” on their gun control laws by using the ”commerce clause” against them. The feds have long misused the commerce clause, twisting it all out of shape to allow themselves to interfere in state business by citing ANYTHING that has ever been SHIPPED interstate allowing them to act. But it’s not working on guns manufactured WITHIN the state, which they cannot touch. “Under the Constitution of the United States, certain limited powers are held by Washington, D.C. By default, all other powers rest in the individual states. The Founders understood the dangers of too much power being held by a central government, and they crafted the Constitution to ensure their newly emerging country would be protected from out-of-touch autocrats.” Of course, those autocrats have “gotten around” that clause for years, in many ways. Now it is being used against them. Additionally, some sates have made laws BANNING the enforcement of federal gun laws. (The Right to Bear)

CCW Could Have Stopped Shooting

At Florida’s Florida State University, they have a “no guns” policy that kept students and staff from carrying legally carried guns onto campus. But that didn’t stop the guy who came on campus armed and shot two students before the cops arrived with their guns and killed him. There were at least TWO students who had CCW permits who COULD have stopped this guy before he was able to shoot two people, while the cops were still en route. But NO! They weren’t allowed to carry their guns on campus, and were thus as defenseless as those shot. Students For Concealed Carry excoriated the “school authorities,” saying those students could have stopped the shootings early, but for the school’s “criminal friendly” gun rules. (Bearing Arms)

Trevon Martin: The Truth

The media did a good job of criminalizing George Zimmerman by lying liberally about him, AND Treyvon Martin. Much of the evidence to show the jury the truth was kept from them, some on very thin “reasoning.” In fact, a prosecutor who insisted on turning over “exculpatory evidence,” which prosecutors are REQUIRED to do, was FIRED for it. Also kept from them was the fact that Martin was a KNOWN thug, burglar and drug dealer; that Zimmerman was NOT “stalking” him, and even if he was, it wasn’t grounds to beat him to death, which Martin was trying to do when he was shot. Evidence PROVES that, just by the injuries Zimmerman suffered, countered by the almost complete LACK of injuries to Martin, except the bullet hole and some abrasions on his hands, which was evidence that He was the aggressor, not Zimmerman.

Additionally, Zimmerman was NOT a “self-appointed” neighborhood watch member, but was duly appointed by the proper authorities and even offered a quasi police car and uniform, which he refused. Then add that Zimmerman himself was part black, on his mother’s side, and Martin was sent to live with his father because he had gotten in trouble at home, and you have a ready picture of a small-time hood that had ATTACKED Zimmerman. Many are the facts that were hidden from the jury AND the world, but he was acquitted, anyway; which infuriated the public, that had been “brainwashed” by the media. The same thing is happening in Ferguson, MO, to a REAL cop, who killed a giant thug who was trying to kill him, and was halfway there when shot. (Backwoods Home Magazine)

Open Carry Arrests Reversed

Cops in Texas (TEXAS, of all places) arrested several people (one in a wheelchair) for carrying TOY guns in September, but they didn’t charge them with carrying guns. They “got around that” by charging them with that “catch-all” charge, “disturbing the peace,” even though the only people there disturbing the peace were the cops, who were overreacting to a DEMONSTRATION against gun laws. (You know, “disturbing the peace” could be anything from running around killing people to farting in public, at the discretion of the enforcer).This charge is designed to allow the cop to arrest ANYBODY, for ANYTHING, or NOTHING. Just because he wants to. They could call it “contempt of cop” and that would be right. But elections mean something. Those seven have had all charges dropped. Did you know that THIRTY states allow open carry WITHOUT a permit required?

And only SIX states don’t allow open carry at all (but at least one , Florida, makes getting a permit easier). FOURTEEN states allow open carry with a permit. That tells me many politicians are “getting wise” to the fact that America does not want those oppressive gun laws that only keep HONEST people unnamed, while doing NOTHING to stop CRIMINALS, who obey NO laws, from getting, and carrying their illicit guns. Maybe someday ALL politicians will learn that their laws don’t work and start thinking about passing laws that DO. But I’m not holding my breath. Turning blue doesn’t appeal to me. The “hard core” gun-grabbers aren’t amenable to reason. They just want to DISARM Americans, for ANY reason, or no REASON at all. (Gun Watch)