Saturday, October 31, 2015
Sen. Schumer (D-what else? NY where else?) wants to force gun makers to the military to make only “smart guns” and “child-proof guns.” Next, he'll want to install “trigger locks” on their guns so it takes them MINUTES to get their guns into action when attacked. Then he'll probably want to force the soldiers to carry them around in locked boxes, to FURTHER slow down their response time. Part of his plan is to use the government's “power of large purchases” to “steamroll” gun makers into following his “orders. He has already told at least one gun maker that if they “follow orders,” he will “bully” buyers into buying from them only. I'd tell Schumer to stick a gun up his flue and pull the trigger. Apparently, Schumer wants to use this to gain more “press.” Bob dole once said of him, “The most dangerous place to be is between him and a camera." (Daily Caller)
Filthy rich Presidential candidate Donald Trump has told the media he “sometimes carries.” which, of course, made the heads of the liberal media members explode and get what brains they had left all over the place. The liberal media have an agenda to disarm all Americans. I don't know why. Maybe they just want to please the liberals, many of whom, I'm sure, carry their own guns because what they do is inherently dangerous. They'd be FOOLS not to. But then, they ARE fools, by definition. Most of them vote Democrat, don't they? I once heard a liberal “reporter” admit that just about everybody he knew in “the biz” DID carry. CBS's John Dickerson asked Trump why he carried. One of the usual stupid questions usually asked by liberal reporters. Trump gave a logical answer: “For protection.” I don't know what Dickerson's answer was, but you can bet it was stupid. Trump, like most presidential candidates, goes about surrounded by armed men. But he's not a hypocrite about it, as are most politicians (Democrats, mostly). He doesn't depend ENTIRELY on them. (Daily Caller)
Friday, October 30, 2015
Liberals and the gun-grabbers like to tell you there is a, “avalanche of gun violence” today. That is one of their most pernicious lies. To prove it is a recent study by Pew research, hardly a “hotbed” of pro-gun sentiment. Their findings are a lot different from what the gun-grabbers (including Obama) want you to think. Gun deaths have GONE DOWN 30% since 1993. Several mass shootings recently have made it LOOK LIKE what they say is true, but what they say is STILL false, as usual. They have no real statistics to back up their wishes, so they HAVE to lie. Contrary to the spoutings of the “Black Lives Matter” crowd, police gun slayings of black men have REDUCED in recent years. Excluding suicides, there was a total REDUCTION in gun homicides from 1993 to 2011. This puts the LIE to what the”Black Lives Matter” crowd, as well as the “gun-grabbers” say. Their conclusion is that current “gun laws” are completely ineffective in stemming gun violence. (Town Hall)
The anti-gun crowd consistently go after the wrong target in their imaginary efforts to stop violent crime. Every time they hear about a murder they want to make more and more laws to DISARM honest Americans while DOING NOTHING to disarm criminals, who obey no laws. Now we find out that there are more murders committed by UNARMED people than by those using guns, by a big margin. So what should we do? Ban hands and feet? Make a FIST illegal? The Criminal Justice Information Center has found that 11,641 murders were committed in the United states in 2014, and 31 in the U. S. Territories, and only 8,124 were committed by use of a gun. Less than HALF! So their contention that “if guns were eliminated, the murder rate would go down” is patently false. Even if it were POSSIBLE to eliminate guns completely, that would not happen. As I've said many times, people who want to do murder WILL find a way. (The Right to Bear)
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Quentin Tarantino, who has made more money than anyone else using guns in his movies,. Called cops “murderers,” just days after a cop was murdered from ambush by an ILLEGALLY armed thug. This is a good example of the practice of “anti-gun fools” to ignore things that don't advance their agenda to outlaw self-defense for honest people, while criminals have no trouble getting their guns illegally. Tarantino says, “I'm on the side of the murderers,” referring, in his feeble mind, to the cops. But actually to all the black men who are being killed by OTHER \black men. That's something people like Tarantino refuse to acknowledge, though it is a basic truth. These protesters “have no shame,” I guess. They couldn't have postponed their rally until New York had finished mourning the recent killings of FOUR innocent cops by NON-innocent black men. (Town Hall)
He spouts it every time he opens his mouth. And he has spouted it this time too, when he tells us we're “under a siege of crime,” when all the best gauges tell us crime is at the bottom of a years-long downward spiral, as more guns become owned by HONEST people, who ”kill off”” many ILLEGALLY-armed criminals with them, preventing those criminals from victimizing them. But Obama doesn't like that. He wants to DISARM those honest people. Leaving all those ILLEGAL guns in the hands of criminals, who use them to victimize us all. He wants to make laws whose usual result is the death of honest people, and DO NOTHING to “stop crime.” Soon, we will be inundated by thousands of Muslim “refugees,” many of whom will be the Islamic terrorists, who have come here under false colors, to kill as many Americans as they can, simply because those Americans do not follow their “religion.” This is a danger we have not had before, but to repulse this “invasion” will require us to obtain more and more guns, legally, if possible, illegally, if necessary. I know that's a terrible thing to say, but it is necessary for it to be said. Our very lives and freedom are at stake. (Bearing Arms)
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
The anti-gun fools have been long trying to find a way to keep us from being able to defend ourselves from criminals (including those who wear badges) from stealing everything we have. They know as long as the Second Amendment protects our right to have and use guns in our own defense, they will always be in danger as they come to steal our stuff, so they can't just BAN guns. Now they've found a way to make our guns useless. It's called, “ammunition control.” Now they're trying to make “laws” to keep us from buying ammunition, and without ammunition, our guns are just good “door stops” so they can loot us at will. It started in Californica, of course. That's where most liberal crime initiatives originate. They're now looking at controlling the sale and purchase of all ammunition. Californica Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom filed a 33-page gun initiative, as usual with a fanciful name to make it sound “reasonable,” the “Safety for All Act of 2015,” which, of course, is NOTHING of the kind. 32 PAGES about taxing and controlling sales of bullets!
I remember one of their earlier “gun laws,” way back when I was selling gun powder fired tear gas guns. It listed, as things to be covered, “any object that can be projected at a person so as to injure or harm him,” or some such. So broad, it could mean ANYTHING, including my fist. I don't know if it's still in effect, but I wouldn't doubt it if it were. Californica is really stupid when it comes to guns. This initiative would require going to a DOJ nameless, faceless bureaucrat, “hat in hand,” tugging your forelock, begging for a “permit:" to buy some bullets. Which, of course, would allow them to create a database of gun owners, assuming that people who buy ammunition own guns. It would also ban private purchases of ammunition from out-of-state suppliers, and blatantly establish a database of (assumed) gun owners who purchase ammunition. This is the kind of stupidity that comes out of the State of Californication. (Twitchy)
They're definitely smarter than Americans! I'm talking about American POLITICIANS, not citizens. They can easily see the danger they're being put in by their government allowing in thousands of Muslim “refugees,” many of whom are simply Islamic terrorists who have come there to kill people. They're going out and buying guns with which to defend themselves. Unlike Americans, many of whom have docilely allowed their government to disarm them in the face of similar danger. Our politicians daily pass unconstitutional measures to DISARM us. Now they're even trying to stop us from buying BULLETS, which have no Second Amendment protection. Guns are useless without bullets. If our danger was just from the usual armed criminals who have no trouble getting their guns ILLEGALLY, that would be one thing. But with the expected influx of Islamic terrorists that Obama is not only ALLOWING in, but is actively using our tax money to FINANCE, makes it a lot worse. I'll tell you frankly, I'm going to get a gun (maybe more than one) and I'm not going to do it legally so the government can't come and take it away from me. You might say I'm opening myself up to charges by saying that, but if those liberal fools can publicly tell people to kill cops with impunity, I shouldn't have to worry. I'm only talking about MAYBE breaking the law, in the FUTURE. Until I DO it, there's no law to be broken, though they'll probably try to make one up. (Freedom Outpost)
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
I keep talking about liberal policies resulting in more crime, and this article proves I'm right. Their policies seem to ALWAYS result in more crime, more murders, more rapes, and more of every kind of crime. In New York City, while Mayor DeBlasio is “reforming the police,” the murder rate spiked 8.3%. The rapes went up 5.8%, and other kinds of crimes went up a whopping 18%! His treatment of the cops has shown graphically that he has NO RESPECT for them, and it's getting them killed. FOUR cops have been MURDERED by BLACK men recently, and he and his friends are STILL accusing the cops of being “murderers.” And the “rules of engagement” he has imposed have, themselves, HANDICAPPED the cops in dealing with the thugs, who have no such restrictions. DeBlasio has “reformed” them, right out of business. If I were a New York City cop, I would have long since quit. The mayor didn't bother to show up for the latest cop funeral, although he did send a note. With the proliferation of guns in the hands of honest people nationwide, crime rates have gone down significantly, everywhere but liberal enclaves like New York City, Chicago, Baltimore, and Detroit. If you don't believe the backlash against the cops is at least partially responsible for the increase in crime in the big city, and the emphasis on the cops “killing black men” is not the “problem they want you to believe it is, you need several head examinations. (Hot Air)
Washington Post claims they have found 29 cases where a concealed weapon holder committed “mass murder.” But their definition of “mass murder” is “iffy,” at best. Even the FBI requires that FOUR people be killed to qualify for mass murder status. A majority of people on this list killed no more than THREE, and many who DID have a “concealed carry permit” were NOT concealing their weapon. In many cases, the gun used was a rifle, or they just BEAT people to death. Which makes their CC permit irrelevant. If even the FEW people on the list who DID qualify mean anything, it is that the laws now on the books, as well as the ones they insist on passing, DO NOTHING to prevent ANY kind of gun murders. So who needs 'em? What I'm saying is that NONE of their current laws would stop ANY gun violence, so why do they insist on continuing to make the same useless laws, over and over, when they don't work? I'd be first in line to support a law that WORKED, but nobody has figured out how to make one, yet. The guy who wrote the article in the Washington Post is a KNOWN “anti-gun activist” and has been found to be lying on many occasions. In this case, he used “data” from the violently anti-gun Violence Policy Center as the basis for his lying article. (Bearing Arms)
Sunday, October 25, 2015
And their membership, as well as their “favorably rating”among Americans, INCREASED—again. That's something liberals never take into account. And it's also reflected in the fact that Obama is known as the best gun salesman in the country.” The more he rants and raves about “the gun problem,” and the more he makes laws and regulations, the higher the guns sales soar. People who think he's ultimately going to ban guns altogether (which is illegal), the more guns they buy, and they hide many of them away so he can't send his thugs later to steal them. So when Hillary did her rant against the NRA, it caused nothing but good things to happen for them, something liberals hate with a passion. So much so, that some of them think all gun owners (except cops and government agents, of course) should all be shot. Really. Gun-haters think the resolution to their problems would be to use a gun to SHOOT pro-gun people. Their lack of logic is inescapable. (The Extract)
Gun-grabbers, like other liberals, like to tell you that, “This is settled science.” The fact that there is no such thing as “settled science” means nothing to them. They once thought the Earth was FLAT. That was “settled science” at the time. In their ignorance. Today, they say “global warming” is “settled science,” although it ISN'T. Now they say that the NRA is DOOMED. They say it is “too rural and too radical to continue.” They say that members will soon become “wiser” and reject the idea that self defense is a priority and will “embrace” taking away our gun rights (my words to describe their foolishness, not theirs). They say that's “settled science,” their usual scam. But that ignores the fact that the NRA continues to grow apace, gaining new members by the millions. That the NRA defeats their silly laws on a regular basis, and they never BECOME laws. The fact is that “gun-grabbing” legislation fails more than it ever succeeds. It's a fact that self defense it important to most INTELLIGENT people. Something they, in their IGNORANCE, can't understand as they go about attempting to make it impossible. (Ricochet)
Saturday, October 24, 2015
Chicago is a great showcase—for US, Every week, it seems, they kill people in large numbers, using illegally-obtained guns, in spite of the tight “gun laws” in Rahm Emanuel's town. Emmanuel says, “I'm angry.” He doesn't say who he's angry at, but it should be himself. We keep telling them their laws don't work, and they keep ignoring us, while hundreds, even thousands of people get killed due to their incompetence and ignorance. One of these days, maybe—they'll “wise up.” But I doubt it. Like most liberals, they think their ideas are superior, and won't hear any disagreement with them. Actually, I'm getting very tired of reporting about all the people that have been killed, due to the ignorance and incompetence of the liberals who have conned their way into positions of authority. What scares me is that maybe one day I will become a victim of this stupidity and incompetence. I'm getting a “little up there,” and guys like me are looked on as “easy targets” by thugs all over. I don't get out much any more, but I DO get out, some—and I see some of the thugs I talk about. I'm just hoping one of them doesn't decide to choose me. If they do, it'll be the biggest mistake they ever made. But that's beside the point. (The Right to Bear)
The whole “anti-gun” movement is built on several fallacies, the first of them is the illusion that making LAWS against gun ownership will stop criminals, crazies, and Islamic terrorists from getting guns. They'll just do what they always do—buy them illegally, or just steal them. Another fallacy is the idea that if guns are removed from the legal world, there will be a lot fewer guns sold. That's true, but only for LEGAL guns. The traffic in ILLEGAL guns will not only continue apace, it will INCREASE, since there will be no other way to get them. They always forget the ILLEGAL arms trade in their fanciful thinking. This is no doubt due to their complete INCOMPETENCE in their jobs. The kind of laws they are making today will NEVER stop, or even slow down, gun violence. But you'll never convince them of that. They're convinced of their own adequacy. Their minds are made up, so don't confuse them with facts. I really get tired of repeating this over and over, but that's the only way to get to those smart enough to realize the truth of what I say. (Grudco)
Friday, October 23, 2015
We don't have a “legal gun proliferation problem.” We have a “thug culture problem,” and we're letting the thugs “take over” with their “Black Lives Matter” horse manure being given serious consideration, even by the Democrat Party, which plans to hold a fund-raising meeting under their auspices. We just can't convince those incompetent bozos in Congress (and other legislative bodies) of that. And I'm talking about bozos in BOTH parties. Those who STILL believe that a LAW will stop evil-doers from getting their guns illegally. Those fools don't GET their guns legally, so NO AMOUNT of laws will curb their gun-ownership, OR the violence that comes from it. A good example of that is the guy in New Mexico who shot at a car over a “lane disagreement” and managed to kill a four-year-old girl. Nobody knows whether or not he owned his gun legally, because the liberal media “somehow” neglected to mention it. But it really doesn't matter does it? He was a THUG, in either case, and a law would not have made piffle of difference. The guy who killed a cop in New York the other day was a KNOWN thug, a “career criminal,” and you can BET his gun was illegally owned. And of course, the thugs are putting out the word that USE of the word, “thug” is racist, in an effort to stop us from using the word, altogether which, if successful, will cause a cessation of criticism of thugs, black and white, if we can't even USE the word, “thug.”. (Bearing Arms)
Where they get their guns. They may not tell you EXACTLY which back-alley gun seller” they go to, to keep him out of jail. But they'll willingly tell you that they rarely, if ever, buy them legally. They always go to somebody who sells them out of the trunk of his car in a back alley somewhere. Mostly because most of them are felons and can't buy them legally, but also because they don't want the guns to be traceable to them after they use them to commit a crime. The “understory” here is that, NO AMOUNT of “gun laws” will prevent them from getting their guns. The “gun-grabbers” realize this unless they're completely ignorant or stupid. But it doesn't stop them from insisting on passing more and more USELESS gun laws every time a criminal or a crazy goes on a shooting rampage with a legal, OR illegal gun. They KNOW this new law won't do a damned things to stop gun violence, but that's not their goal. Their goal is to reduce the chances of Americans having guns they can use against THEM when they send their thugs (with badges) to steal what's ours in the future. They don't worry about the guns in the hands of criminals, because they are “kindred souls” who are doing their own stealing. (America's First Freedom)
Thursday, October 22, 2015
In response top the wave of Palestinian (Islamic terrorist) personal violence against individual Israelis, the government in Israel is “relaxing” the requirements to get a “carry permit.” Would that our politicians be as intelligent. But not a chance. They don't care about how many people get killed by the ILLEGAL guns in the hands of criminals and crazies—and soon in the hands of all the Islamic terrorists Obama is importing by the thousands. Our politicians are only interested in disarming the HONEST people who OBEY their useless laws. It would be smart to elect politicians who REALIZE that we need more guns in the hands of honest, reliable people to counter the millions of guns in the hands of fools, But it ain't agonna happen as long as people who pay NO attention to politics keep voting in those idiots who think a LAW is going to stop the fools who don't OBEY laws from getting their guns. I got it! Declare Israel a “gun-free zone!” That'd do it! Er.... (Town Hall)
What do you do if you're a cop who stops a young driver (white or black) for a bona-fide violation and he (or she) refuses to cooperate, deciding to attack you and get your gun? If it evolves into a life-threatening situation, as it did with that giant kid in Ferguson, MO, who is trying his best to kill you? What do you do? Let him/her kill you “because it's just a kid (who happens to be big as a house?)” You can get killed by a kid as easily as by an old, grizzled man. You're just as dead. He doesn't have a gun, you say? That Brown kid didn't have a gun, but he still could have killed the cop. Trevon Martin was “just a kid,” too. And while he was banging George Zimmernan's head against the concrete sidewalk, beating his brains out (he was a martial arts pro), he got shot. (Yeah, I know, Zimmerman was not a cop, but Martin WAS “just a kid” who could have killed him. I know there are other cases like these—many of them.
We don't know all the intimate details of them. Cops are out there with “targets on their backs” and, if they overdo it, there are ways to deal with that without killing them from ambush. That will only make things worse. They'll become “super conscious” of the danger and WILL “shoot first and ask questions later,” which will make it a “self-fulfilling prophecy.” And even more people will die, black AND white. Yes, don't stand by and let such things happen. But DO wait a bit until ALL the facts are in before you “go off the deep end” on an individual case, unlike the “authorities” in Baltimore when they indicted six cops in the death of Freddy Gray, who killed HIMSELF while trying to incriminate cops by banging his head against the wall, soon after his back surgery. The point is, going out and killing cops is the wrong answer, and one proffered by the criminals, themselves, to “get the cops off their backs.” Don't buy into it. (Town Hall)
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
They really want to brainwash our kids, don't they? Now they're sending cops into schools to con those young, impressionable students into making a pledge “never to touch a gun.” (with the collaboration of the schools, of course) What that's going to mean to those kids who grow up to. become cops and other kinds of law enforcement agents, including federal agents, I don't know. This is the same kind of thing that the old Soviet Union did. They had regular programs running to brainwash kids, as young as possible, knowing they didn't have the “fund of knowledge” to know they were being fed a bunch of horse manure, and knowing they would then be easier to con later. You people who are too young to know what the Soviet Union was, and why we should NOT attempt to emulate them, PLEASE do some research—if you can find it, since the current fools are working feverishly to eradicate it. (Tuscaloosa News)
I know the anti-gun fools don't want you to know that, and they routinely deny it. But the facts are that the more LEGAL guns there are out there, the less crime there is. Why, I'm not sure. Maybe it's because legal gun owners have killed so many crooks that they can no longer commit crimes, I don't know. Maybe it's because the very thought of their intended victims being armed and able to kill them when they try and rob them scares the hell out of them. Those are both very good reasons. But the FBI report, “Crime in the United States,” has been released for 2014 and the crime rates went down, while the number of LEGAL gun sales increased. The same was true of the 2013 report. The anti-gun fools not only ignore these statistics, they DENY them. They constantly talk about the “epidemic of gun violence” that doesn't exist. (National Shooting Sports Foundation)
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
The “Black Lives Matter” spokesman says now, “Repeal the Constitution or it's 'the bullet' for white Americans.” And he really thinks that will get us to “repeal the Constitution. While actually thinking that we're afraid of his threats. Okay, bring it. We can shoot him as well as he can shoot us. Give us an excuse, huh? We'll be glad to thin his ranks of all his phony “officers.” What a bunch of damned fools these “Black Lives” Matter dummies are!
WHY EVEN CONSIDER DEMOCRATS? One Democrat (the admitted socialist) is telling us he's going to raise taxes even more while he takes away our right to self defense, while the other says deleting the Second Amendment and taking all our guns is “worth considering” while the others aren't saying much of anything. So what the hell are we (not me) even THINKING about voting for them for?
PRESIDENT ALWAYS TO BLAME: It doesn't matter if it was, or was not his fault, the sitting president always gets the blame for anything that goes wrong, but not the credit for what goes right. In the case of Trump's blaming Bush for 9/11, it was the policies set in motion by a Clinton' appointee whose policies formed “the wall” that prevented government agencies from sharing information. Policies that were instantly changed by Bush when their importance was realized.
WILL BIDEN RUN? Of course! What do you think they're building up for with all the breathless announcements about his “impending announcement” of his candidacy. Did anybody think his phony recitation of his dead son's “last words” was said for nothing? Actually, I'm getting tired of hearing that question. I hope he actually ANNOUNCES his candidacy before the election so Democrats can actually vote for him (If they're really dumb enough). I won't be.
BEST GUN SALESMAN AROUND: Barack Hussein Obama. The more he thrashes around trying to destroy our ability to defend ourselves by making laws that keep HONEST people from getting guns, while criminals just get them ILLEGALLY, the more guns get sold, both legally and illegally. He'll never “tumble” to this, and will keep making LAWS that criminals, crazies, and Islamic terrorists violate, and the more guns there will be “out there.” He really believes, in his incompetence, that making laws will stop CRIMINALS from getting guns, when they are, by definition, CRIMINALS. And criminals do not OBEY laws.
INJECTING POLITICS: In two important cases, Obama has “stuck his oar” into important investigations, and the FBI doesn't like it. He did so in the Petraeus case, and subsequently, what should have been felony charges were reduced to misdemeanors. He did it again in the Hillary private e-mail case, saying that, “while she did make a mistake in using a private e-mail server, there were no national security implications.” But there WERE. Any communication to or from the Secretary of State had “national security implications.” She had no other e-mail account, so that was the ONLY way to contact her by e-mail. So Obama was absolutely WRONG to inject himself into that investigation.
When asked, the criminals in jail who were questioned (who were overwhelmingly black, because the questioners couldn't find that many white guys in that prison), who told their questioners they were IN FAVOR of “gun control.” Left unsaid is why, on which the “worm turns.” If more guns are legally in the hands of honest people, being an armed criminal is a lot safer because they can usually count on their intended victim not being armed. But they don't tell you that in the articles talking about NRA's time “being short” while NRA continues to gain millions of new members (black and white). Raw statistics rarely tell the whole story, that being that the people who are most in favor of gun control are the criminals, who don't obey ANY laws. That ought to tell you something, hey? Of course, they'll call me racist because I had the temerity to mention “blacks” here. (Bearing Arms)
That's what they're calling Barack Hussein Obama. But I'm sure he hates that, because he is unalterably OPPOSED to guns, in any form, except in HIS hands, or the hands of people of which he approves. But that's the effect of all his efforts to limit our right to self defense, and to own and use the means to it, a gun, while criminals, crazies, and Islamic terrorists have no trouble getting their guns ILLEGALLY. He pushes the idea that LAWS will prevent them from getting the illegal guns they use to victimize us, while all they do is make “sitting ducks” of us, while the “bad guys” victimize us. So the more he tries to ban guns, or do things that will make guns useless (like “controlling” ammunition), the more guns he sells, and the more money gun makers make. He hasn't figured this out, and probably never will. He isn't smart enough. He will continue hes efforts, and gun sales will continue to soar, both legal and illegal. (Western Journalism Center)
Monday, October 19, 2015
For arming themselves to combat the recent rash of stabbings of Jews. Apparently, like most liberals, he thinks Jews should just “stand still and let themselves be stabbed.” He says, “Israel has the right to defend itself,” but “discourages the 'self-help' approach of being armed.” Why? What POSSIBLE logic would contribute to that opinion? Does HE not go around behind a WALL of armed security? Does he advise just waiting for the armed cops to come while some deranged Palestinian is stabbing him? Of course, Kerry pulled out and “Dusted off” that old, tired call for a “two-state solution” where Palestinians get rewarded for their killing spree. He says “there is a time for security and a time for diplomacy.” You're right, Kerry. But this is a “time for security.” Your diplomacy FAILED, and continues to fail because your ideas are STUPID. (Weasel Zippers)
By his own thinking. D. Watkins is a fool who thinks EVERYBODY who buys a gun, legal or illegal, should be shot. Meanwhile, he admits to owning at least TWO guns, bought illegally. He was under age when he bought his first one, “on the street.” And he daily took it to school with him, in Baltimore, a city with some of the tightest “gun laws” known to man. He apparently doesn't understand that he agrees with me that EVERYBODY ought to be able to be armed, just to stay alive. He says, “I'd prefer to be caught WITH a fun than without one. But in his muddled thinking, he thinks everybody who buys a gun (except him, of course) ought to be shot, just for buying it, Of course, he, by his own admission, still has at least TWO guns. He says, “It's easier to get guns than jobs in East Baltimore.” He thinks that proves that the guns, themselves, are to blame. But it is the PEOPLE who MISUSE them that are to blame.
He just can't see it. He says, “we got our guns, too” (ILLEGALLY, in spite of the law, which again proves that laws against buying guns don't stop gun buying). He thinks that's justification for people buying guns for self-defense (like he did) should get them all killed. Such muddy thinking is what PASSES for knowledge where he lives. He can't see that it is the PEOPLE where he lives that make guns dangerous, not the guns, themselves. It's the ILLEGAL buying of guns and the willingness to shoot and kill over trifles that makes it wrong. Most people aren't that way. They don't go around killing people for imagined dalliances with girls. What we need to do is teach people that killing others over small things is NOT “normal” and to keep their guns in their pockets unless threatened. I have owned guns, and have had a “carry permit.” And I have killed NO ONE. And I have lived in the same world as he has, for a lot longer than he has.
I have never seen anybody murdered, except on TV (and that was phony) or in one of those abominable Islamic terrorist beheading videos. Maybe Watkins should “wake up” and understand that is HIS society that promotes not only ILLEGAL gun buying, but promiscuous murder and self-defense with a gun, as well. Intelligent people don't go around shooting each other over the “smallest slight,” imagined or not. He's right that they should do a better job of “rooting out” the illegal gun sellers, and they could if they didn't have to spend their time and money monitoring and controlling LEGAL gun sales while the ILLEGAL gun sales continue uncontrolled. It appears, looking at the photo accompanying this article, that he knows as little about gun safety as does the best-known,”anti-gun fool,” Sen. Diane Feinstein as he has two guys point guns at his head with their fingers on the triggers. He's probably lucky to be alive, since their fingers didn't slip. (Bearing Arms)
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Tom Sowell has a positive TALENT for simplifying things to the “lowest common denominator. In a recent article about gun control, he said this: ““The grand illusion of zealots for laws preventing ordinary, law-abiding people from having guns is that "gun control" laws actually control guns. In a country with many millions of guns, not all of them registered, this is a fantasy and a farce. Guns do not vanish into thin air because there are gun control laws. Guns -- whether legal or illegal -- can last for centuries. Passing laws against guns may enable zealots to feel good about themselves, but at the cost of other people's lives. Why anyone would think that criminals who disobey other laws, including laws against murder, would obey gun control laws is a mystery. A disarmed population makes crime a safer occupation and street violence a safer sport.” Which, of course, is what I've been telling those gun control fools for years, albeit using many more words. But are they listening to me? Will they listen to Tom? Doubtful on both points. They aren't that intelligent. Or they have a different agenda than what they're telling us about. (Town Hall)
It's damned foolishness and incompetence to disarm honest, reliable Americans while doing nothing to keep guns away from criminals. They can't do much about that, you say? Then why DISARM us while the criminals, crazies, and terrorists have free access to their guns? Another thing that's damned foolishness is thinking that a LAW will keep criminals and other evil-doers from getting their guns, with which to victimize us. All that does is make “sitting ducks” of us all, leaving us no way to defend ourselves when confronted with a criminal holding a gun. You'd think politicians would be smart enough to know these things. But apparently they're not, because they keep making those fool laws such as declaring “gun-free zones.” in which most mass killings occur, gun registration schemes, in which ONLY honest people register their guns while the “bad guys” ignore it, “gun locks,” (which only makes it take longer to get our guns into action while the "bad guys" already have theirs in their hands), and crooks also ignore, etc. I keep saying most politicians are INCOMPETENT, and this is but one illustration of the truth of my opinion. There are many more that ALSO cost people their lives, but this is just a few of the most obvious. (Just common sense)
Saturday, October 17, 2015
And violent crime goes down. Again. There is no “epidemic of gun violence,” as the gun-grabbers want you to believe. I keep telling those anti-gun fools, but they keep ignoring me—and all the others trying to get through their thick skulls. They aren't interested in facts. Their minds are made up, so you can't “confuse them with facts.” We've been telling them and telling them this, but they don't care—which tells me they're only out to disarm the American people for their own reasons,and not those they put out. They couldn't care less about violent crime. They just want to get as many LEGAL guns out of honest people's hands as possible, so when their thugs come to take what's ours (as they're doing, every day, just ask the rancher they just told his land is not his anymore), they will not meet a gun in the hands of their intended victims. That's the only reason I can think of for them to IGNORE LOGIC and keep on pushing those USELESS “gun laws.” Maybe they're just STUPID. I don't know. Why is this only reported by a “pro-gun” site? That's easy. The liberal media won't report it because it doesn't advance their agenda to disarm America. (Bearing Arms)
That's what Hillary, and many other liberals want. Why? Do they really think repealing the Second Amendment will stop criminals—who don't obey ANY laws—from getting their guns? They SAY their goal is to “stop gun violence,” but all the laws they have been passing, and the ones they envision for the future don't have a prayer of “stopping gun violence.” They have PROVEN that. But they keep making those laws, and threaten to make worse ones, like the one Hillary is suggesting now. I think their wish is simply to DISARM HONEST PEOPLE for their own nefarious purposes. That's the only thing I can think of why so many politicians (mostly Democrats, but some Republicans, too) want to keep the American people from being able to defend themselves while most of them go around behind a WALL of armed security agents. Repealing the Second Amendment is like repealing the Constitution, itself. It's the BULWARK of our system of government. The system that has made America the “destination of choice” for MILLIONS of people who wish to live in freedom and prosperity, not to mention real security. That won't get that last if the politicians take away their right to self-defense. (Conservative Byte)
Friday, October 16, 2015
In auto racing, it's a known fact that yellow flags “breed yellow flags.” It's almost a guarantee. You can have an accident-free race for hundreds of laps, then, BANG! A car hits another, or the wall, and a yellow flag ensues. Then another quickly follows. The same is true of “mass shootings.” One mass shooting will ”breed” another. That one will breed yet another, and soon you have an epidemic of mass shootings. There are usually “red flags” unknowingly “sent up” by the potential shooter, but they are routinely IGNORED, until they start shooting up a place. Then it's too late. The “gun-grabbers” trot out their USELESS GUN LAWS that never work the way they're intended and call for more of them to be made. They all happen in “gun-free zones,” but tell me how many SUCCESSFUL mass shootings have happened anywhere else? It doesn't matter if they're done with legally-registered guns because all registering them do is (maybe) help them find the shooter AFTER his victims are dead. One guy TRIED a shooting in a gun store and ended up with more lead in him than one man could carry.
Gun-free zones NEVER keep people who want to do “gun crime” out of places that are so posted. Those bent on mass murder never worry about violating a piddling gun law. The cops are usually no help at all, and can only get there (usually) AFTER the killing is done, to “document” the crime. An armed person THERE at the time of the crime is the ONLY ANSWER, as they found out in that Colorado springs, Colorado church shooting where one small FEMALE who was a legal carrier was there worshiping, and shot the shooter before he could kill more than one or two people. They CALLED HER a “security guard,” but that was only after the fact. She was a worshiper in the church who happened to be armed. So the pastor ASKED her to ACT as a “security guard” while she was there. She was NOT hired” as a security guard. The upshot of it is, that ONE ARMED PERSON on the scene stopped yet another mass killing in a place where the shooter expected to be a “gun-free zone,” just as I have been saying, all along. I hate to say, “I told ya so,” but “I told ya so.” (CNN)
Thursday, October 15, 2015
Lonnie and Sandy Phillips sued several “deep-pockets” people, based on the Aurora Theater shooting, and lost. And they lost more than the suit. The judge decided they were to pay the legal fees of the plaintiffs. They may even lose their HOME. The suit was an “expensive mistake” on their part. It was filed at the urging of the “Brady Bunch," which left town without comment when they lost. Brady goads many people into frivolous suits, and loses with a regularity beyond belief, but usually not without punishing the victims of the suits with court costs and their own defense costs, win or lose. And a law should be made making the “suer” responsible for court costs in ALL “frivolous lawsuits” when they lose, to make people think twice before starting them.
As I've said before, (and is recognized in the article linked below), suing gun-makers when people MISUSE their LEGAL products is the same as suing auto makers when a drunk or incompetent driver misuses a car. This would be DEATH for retail or wholesale sales in this country. Of course, Congress has “ridden to the rescue” with the passage of the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” that protects gun sellers from such frivolous suits that deplete their assets without merit. A law making it mandatory for the losing side to pay the court costs in all cases would work even better, and remove the incentive for people to file suits they KNOW they will lose, just to hurt the other side by making them pay court costs. (Bearing Arms)
In a recent Article, Professor Tom Sowell (a black man, so liberals will never listen to him on anything) cites some obvious facts liberals ignore in their quest to make the American people DEFENSELESS against armed criminals, and now armed Islamic terrorists as he helps them come here by the thousands, even paying their way, in some cases. But the first thing he does is tell us a basic truth: “The zealotry of gun-control advocates might make some sense if they had any serious evidence that more restrictive gun-control laws actually reduce gun crimes. But they seldom even discuss the issue in terms of empirical evidence.” Then there's Obama traipsing all over the graves of the dead from not just the Oregon killings, but many other mass shootings, too, in his “gun ban” quest.
It has become a pattern. The residents hated it, and told him so in so may words. But he no longer cares what Americans think, since he no longer can retain the presidency legally. Sowell points out that there are MOUNTAINS of evidence that the laws they make today DON'T WORK, but they are plainly oblivious to this. They just go right on making them, making honest Americans more vulnerable to those who don't obey ANY laws. Some of that evidence PROVES CONCLUSIVELY that “gun-free zones” and their other laws don't work, but the gun-grabbers ignore it. Which tells me they simply want to DISARM Americans, whatever the cost in lives and misery, for their own purposes. I'm convinced those purposes were the same as were Hitler's when he disarmed Germany before he “took over” as dictator. (Tom Sowell)
It has become a pattern. The residents hated it, and told him so in so may words. But he no longer cares what Americans think, since he no longer can retain the presidency legally. Sowell points out that there are MOUNTAINS of evidence that the laws they make today DON'T WORK, but they are plainly oblivious to this. They just go right on making them, making honest Americans more vulnerable to those who don't obey ANY laws. Some of that evidence PROVES CONCLUSIVELY that “gun-free zones” and their other laws don't work, but the gun-grabbers ignore it. Which tells me they simply want to DISARM Americans, whatever the cost in lives and misery, for their own purposes. I'm convinced those purposes were the same as were Hitler's when he disarmed Germany before he “took over” as dictator. (Tom Sowell)
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
In clear Obama fashion Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel (Obama's former “go-to-guy” in the White House—the one who infamously was heard to say, “Never let a good panic go to waste,” blames his “gun violence problem” on the cops “going fetal” after the Ferguson debacle. Which may be true, in part, but can you blame them with that big target on their backs? Liberals like Rahm unfairly blamed the death of a gigantic thug who was trying to kill a cop for the cop killing him in self-defense, while ignoring the fact that it is his “extremely tight gun laws that keep guns out of the hands of honest people and makes them “easy targets” for the gang members and crooks (a repetition, there), who get their guns ILLEGALLY, thus bypassing his silly little laws. That's the REAL cause of the increase in gun crime in Chicago. But he isn't intelligent enough to realize it—or he just refuses to accept reality. (Twitchy)
Professor Dean Hammermesh quit his job and took one in Australia because he hates the new “open carry” approved rule by University of Austin-Texas. In his letter of resignation he said, “What if a disgruntled student brings his gun and shoots me?” A good question, but a stupid idea. What the hell does he think would stop a student who really wanted to kill him from breaking a little law like one saying he can't bring a gun on campus if he was bent on MURDER? A law banning guns on campus would do NOTHING to prevent that from happening. And moving to Australia ain't gonna make it any better. Meanwhile some students share his “concerns,” but will protest it by “open carrying”--DILDOS. What they think THAT will accomplish, I don't know. But then, ALL anti-gun fools are somewhat short in the brain department, if they can't see the self-defense nature of “open carry” of GUNS (not dildos). Some people are just STUPID. (Liberty Alliance)
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Obama talks a good game about “reducing gun crime," but the things he does INCREASE it. For instance, he's seeing to it that 6,000 prisoners who have been drug offenders are released shortly. Many of whom have used guns in their “work,” some even using automatic weapons. We're talking about “semi-autos” here, not just automatic handguns. Literally “machine guns.” Many have been convicted of gun violence. The writer of the article linked here says, “Releasing so many “hardened criminals” in a short time will CERTAINLY send the crime rate, specifically the GUN crime rate skyrocketing.” But Obama doesn't care. He's got a “societal experiment” in mind, and he will not be dissuaded from it. He's sending some to “halfway houses,: for all the good that will do in keeping them from resuming their life of crime. He's sending others to “immigration authorities,” for “eventual deportation.” You know how well THAT works. They'll probably disappear into the populace and never be heard from again until their next violent crime. If he IS deported, he will be back, as soon as he can. It's obvious to INTELLIGENT people that this is a very BAD move, but it's NOT obvious to such as Obama. They call them “small time crooks,” but many of them are repeat offenders. And when the crime rate predictably skyrockets, they will blame it in the Republicans, or one specific Republican, George W. Bush, as usual. (Bearing Arms)
He says, “We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings (not true). Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.” There's one little problem with that. Those laws HAVE NOT 'almost eliminated' mass shootings. They have INCREASED all kinds of gun crimes. He wants “the same kind of peace enjoyed by Chicago.” What? Did he just SAY that? He might as well have just come out and said, “I'm stupid!” Chicago is STILL one of the TOP gun crime cities, after they've passed some damned TIGHT “gun laws.” Laws so tight that some of them have been deemed unconstitutional by the courts. Either he's STUPID, or he WANTS to increase the crime rate so he can make tougher “rules and regulations” to “control it.” Chicago (his home town) is the BEST illustration of the fact that gun control, as they know it, DOESN'T WORK. But they will never see that. Since their “hand gun bad went into effect in 1982, murders by gun has INCREASED by 40%! That's almost halfway to DOUBLING it! By 2005, an amazing 97% of murders in Chicago were by gun! In 2014, AFTER their handgun ban had been erased, their gun crime rate was at its lowest in many years, but still not as low as before it was passed. That's another FACT they'll never acknowledge. They're too damned dumb. Meanwhile, the crooks themselves tell us that the great majority of guns they use were gotten ILLEGALLY, which means the “gun laws” would not touch them. (Bearing Arms)
Monday, October 12, 2015
Whoop de do! Of course, he did. It's easy to score goals when nobody is really trying to stop you on pain of death or imprisonment. That reminds me of the story about a two-car race between a Russian and an American car. The American car came in first, and the Russian press reported that the Russians came in second, while the Americans came in next to last. That's just the way things are in Russia (still) even though “communism has collapsed” there. But the SAME PEOPLE are still in charge there and they are STILL a SOCIALIST country. Socialism is a close cousin of communism.
OBAMA DEPRESSED: He's depressed by Republicans, who are 'down on America'.” He just doesn't understand that they aren't “down on America,” they're “down on OBAMA!” How could they NOT be when he has spent more money than there IS, increased the national debt 300% printed enough money with nothing behind it to make every dollar now in circulation worth a lot less, screwed up the medical profession, made a deal with Iran that is certain to come back to “bite us in the butt,” and has done many other things that have made us the laughingstock of the world, weakened us severely, and is screwing this country up, terribly.
EPA BUYING MILITARY WEAPONS: That's the word. The EPA is buying millions of dollars' worth of military-style weapons. What the hell FOR? They're supposed to be only concerned with the environment. Are they planning on “going military” on people who accidentally kill a “jumping mouse,” or what? I understand other supposedly non-law enforcement agencies are ALSO buying up guns and ammunition. What are they planning? Are they EXPECTING a revolution, or what? Or are they just planning on using their “jack boots?”
SAID BY A DEMOCRAT: Debbie Wasserman Schultz, DNC Chair says, “Republicans want to get rid of all women.” Boy, are they desperate! Can she point out ONE Republican who provably expressed such a wish? Doubtful. She's doing what Democrats do all the time. Making up things and attributing them to Republicans. I'd bet she cites an “imaginary friend” whom she will not name for this. Just like Harry Reid did, several times, when he slandered Republicans. She really believes that “any of their candidates” could easily beat ANY Republican. Which tells us a lot about her lack of intelligence.
“STICKING IT TO OBAMA”: Iran just “stuck it to” Obama when they just fired off a ballistic missile test, in VIOLATION of the recently signed “agreement” with Obama, that he has “crowed about” mightily, just as if it were a real accomplishment. No further proof of the phoniness of this “agreement” is necessary. It's all in Obama's mind, as Iran's mullahs have been saying publicly daily. It's a typical Obama scam, designed to make us THINK he accomplished something.
DWB DIDN'T IDENTIFY HOSPITAL: There's been a lot of criticism of the bombing of a “hospital” run by “Doctors Without Borders.” I don't know what could have been done to stop bombing it, since they did NOTHING to identify themselves as a hospital. It's a Geneva Convention requirement that they put internationally recognizable insignia on their roofs to forestall such “mistakes.” Those bombing them are NOT at fault.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE: Obama's recent statement saying Joe Biden is the “best vice-president in history” is yet another example of Democrats making dumb statements without any proof behind them and EXPECTING us to believe them. Like Debbie's crack about Republicans wanting to get rid of women (a really STUPID crack), of Harry Reid's quoting an “imaginary friend” that Romney hadn't paid any taxes (patently false) for ten years. It's a common Democrat scam.
But they keep doing the same old things, anyway. Isn't doing the same things over and over and expecting a different result the DEFINITION of insanity? Obama made a speech recently (he's always doing that) in which he praised what some other countries are doing to “stem gun crime.” You know, the old “confiscate guns” scheme. What he failed to mention is that their gun confiscation mostly FAILED to “stem gun violence” and actually, it INCREASED, predictably. He also failed to mention the fact that we have the Second Amendment (and they don't) that prohibits him from confiscating our guns. Of course, he ignores the Constitution when it suits him, but cites it when he thinks it backs his position—such as in baby killing, for instance. There will never be agreement on guns until we get some INTELLIGENT people in office. And I don't think that's going to happen soon. Republicans SHOULD be the ones, but they have lately shown they are not any more intelligent than Democrats. So I don't know what we're going to do, except to keep whupping them every time they try. (Town Hall)
Ben Carson was right when he said “gun control, plus propaganda dissemination” was largely responsible for their success in subjugating the German people. When a would-be dictator wants to “take over,” the first thing he does is DISARM the people, as Obama and all the current Democrat presidential candidates want to do. They whine about “gun crime,” but all the laws they propose (and pass) do NOTHING to stop gun violence. All they do is DISARM people who OBEY such laws, wrong though they may be. So what is their purpose? Each one of the Democrat candidates, AND Obama want to be a dictator. The “limitations” they all promote on the American people show that, every day. Hillary, for example, is a “firm believer” in their brand of “gun control,” as is Bernie Sanders. You KNOW Obama's position on it. Yes, I know, the Jews didn't like guns, anyway. But the rest of the German people DID. And Hitler effectively used the lack of guns among the German people as a means to subjugate them. (Eagle Rising)
Sunday, October 11, 2015
The anti-gun fools keep telling us that private citizens with their own guns never stop the shooters who shoot places up because they never read about it in the news. There's a good reason for that. The liberal media doesn't report it when it happens. Only the “alternative (conservative) media" reports it, and those fools only read New York Times and Huffington Post. So they miss stories like the one where an Uber driver who had a carry permit in Chicago (a rarity) shot and wounded a shooter who opened fire on a crowd of people, saving many lives. Of course, Uber, when they heard, made a rule to keep their drivers from being armed. But they couldn't enforce it because all Uber drivers own their own cars. Then there's the Philadelphia barber shop where a fool opened fire on a shopful of customers and was immediately dispatched by another man in the shop who had a carry permit.
In a hospital NEAR Philly, a man shot two people and was looking around for more victims when he was shot by another hospital visitor. In Plymouth, PA, a man shot another man in a bar and was approaching the bartender, who had a carry permit and shot him. That's just three of many I know about because I read more than the liberal rags. And notice ALL these shootings happened where guns are prohibited. The men who shot the shooters were “breaking the rules (not laws),” too. But if they hadn't, more people would have died The liberal fools who tell us a civilian shooter in these cases would just mean more bullets in innocent people as they go about wildly shooting in all directions show a complete ignorance about well-trained and legal gun owners. Which is common among them, and predictable. (Town Hall)
We keep telling the politicians that “gun-free zones” don't work, and get people killed, and the school shooting in Oregon proves it, yet again. Will they take note and get rid of all the “gun-free zones?” Not a chance. They're not intelligent enough. They will keep on creating them, and people will DIE because of it. In case you haven't noticed, just about ALL “mass shootings” happen in “gun-free zones.” But do the people making the gun laws notice? No. They keep on making their useless people-killing laws that only the law-abiding obey—and sometimes die because they do. Thus proving that they aren't interested in stemming “gun violence.” They're only interested in taking guns out of the hands of the LAW-ABIDING so when their thugs come to take what's theirs, they don't run into any guns. That's the only reason for them continuing to make these STUPID laws I can see. (Liberty Alliance)
Saturday, October 10, 2015
Liberals are saying Dr. Ben Carson (presidential candidate on the Republican side) made “another gaffe” when he compared America to Nazi Germany. Only one problem. He didn't. He did NOT say the “holocaust” was CAUSED by gun control, only that gun control FACILITATED it. And there IS a comparison between the holocaust, where the German people either closed their eyes to the unwarranted killing of the Jews or actively participated in it. Our OWN holocaust is at Planned Parenthood, where they have MURDERED millions of babies, primarily black ones. American citizens are actively “looking the other way” while this killing and selling of tiny body parts is going on, and some are , like in Nazi Germany, PARTICIPATING. I know that gun control wasn't a “causative factor” in the German holocaust, but it WAS a “contributing factor” in the overall. The Holocaust was CAUSED by “unreasoning hatred of Jews, PUSHED by the Nazi government, and carried out by them. Today's holocaust was ALSO caused by an unreasoning hatred of blacks by an organization STARTED by a racist, who wanted to “get rid of” as many black babies as possible. There's a REASON why most of their “clinics” are located in black areas. That's where most of their customers are. Of course, liberals will miss the point of this item altogether and call ME a racist for MENTIONING “black people.” But truth is truth. And the link here IS black. (Allen West)
I've said a number of times that the people running things in this country are largely incompetent. One of the areas of their incompetence is in their reaction to “gun violence.” Instead of going after the real causes of it, they try and eliminate guns—something that is impossible to do, and wouldn't stop the “gun violence,” anyway. Criminals, and people who want to do mass shootings will still get their guns, as they always have, in spite of tight “gun laws.” Take Chicago, for instance. They have laws so tight the courts are declaring many of them unconstitutional. Yet, at the same time, they have one of the highest “gun crime” stats in the country. Right now, they're suffering from an “epidemic of gun violence. The same thing is true of many cities with tight gun laws. Cities like Detroit, New York, Los Angeles, etc. But do these politicians learn from this? Not a chance.
They're completely myopic on the subject. Australia all but BANNED guns, entirely, and their gun crime rate went into the stratosphere. Meanwhile, instead of going after the SHOOTERS, they go after the guns. That's where incompetence comes in. If they were COMPETENT, they'd see to it laws were made to punish USE of guns in crime and STOP the practice of using existing gun use laws as “bargaining chips” to get convictions in other crimes. They'd find better ways to figure out who is more prone to doing such things and make laws that would stop them from being able to do gun violence. There are many other ways to do this, but they never even TRY to use them. They just try the impossible, to “eliminate guns,” which is an impossibility. Their answer is always to take guns away from HONEST, law-abiding people, and leave them completely defenseless in the face of ILLEGALLY-armed criminals. Their incompetence gets people killed. (Just common sense)
Friday, October 9, 2015
Two of the most cherished laws by the “gun-grabbers” are their “gun-free zones” and “background checks.” Both were violated by the shooter in the Oregon college shooting that killed NINE people and wounded another 7 (or nine, depending on who's reporting). The “gun-grabbers” are making a “big thing” about those guns being :legal,” completely forgetting that the guns he had were first brought onto the school grounds ILLEGALLY because in the U. S., EVERY SCHOOL is a “gun-free zone.” An he passed every “background check” he was subjected to under their laws, and still was able to collect 13 guns and kill nine people. So NONE of their damned laws had ANY effect on his ability to get his guns and go out and kill people. Which proves, AGAIN, that the laws they pass can DO NOTHING to “prevent gun violence.” The fact is that 92% of such mass shootings HAPPEN in “gun-free zones.”: So what the hell GOOD are they? Meanwhile, many of the shooters easily pass their highly vaunted “background checks.” as did this killer and the killer of those television people. So what they hell good are THEY? Fact is, none of their highly touted “gun laws” do ANYTHING to stop these people from their murderous desires. So why do they waste the time and money to PASS them? Why? Because politicians want to DISARM all Americans so their thugs won't meet a gun when they come to take what's ours and enslave us. They couldn't care less about “gun violence.” (Breitbart)
That's Hillary's most recent “solution” to the “gun-violence problem.” Suing gun makers when users of their guns MISUSE them. Another good reason NOT to elect her to ANYTHING, much less the presidency. Maybe next, she'll have a law made allowing drivers to sue car makers when they crash into things because of their bad driving. Getting such a law made for gun makers will certainly hurt the gun-making business. Gun makers will not want to be put in the “cross-hairs” of fools who misuse their guns and then want to sue somebody with deep pockets for their own incompetence or criminality. The fact is, gun makers are NOT responsible for the stupidity of people who don't know how to safely use their guns, or use them in criminal acts. So we'll probably lose the rest of the gun makers still in business (and all their tax money and jobs), as they either go out of business or move to a different country, out of reach of American suers. And then there will be the “bootleg” gun makers you won't be able to find to sue after misusing their guns. (Rush Limbaigh)
Thursday, October 8, 2015
We've pointed out many times that a “militia” was ALL THE PEOPLE at the time the Constitution was written. NO “organized state militia was in existence at the time, so the term “militia: in the Second Amendment COULD NOT mean that people had to be a MEMBER of an “organized militia” to be able to exercise that RIGHT. to self-defense and to have and carry the means to that end, a gun. It could NOT POSSIBLY have meant that. But they still insist that ANYBODY, to be armed,. MUST BE a “member of an organized militia.” What is it about “ALL THE PEOPLE” do they not understand? Likewise, they misread the constitution AGAIN on the subject of “the separation of church and state.” They keep insisting it is IN the Constitution when it ISN'T. That term ONLY APPEARED in a LETTER between two of the Founders.
The Constitution merely says, “NO LAW can be made regarding religion OR the free practice thereof.” Militant atheists keep pushing for ALL VESTIGES of religion being removed from ANY governmental institution, from schools to ALL government buildings. Thus the removal of the Ten Commandments from a state building recently. Of course, when ISLAM is taught in our schools, they are strangely silent. They only protest Christianity. But again my question is, “What part of 'NO LAW against religion or the free practice thereof” don't they understand? They're either STUPID, or they have another goal in mind. (Washington's Blog)
Gun-grabbers think if they can just “get rid of all the guns,” the world would be a safer place, and they could eliminate “gun crime.” In the first place, there is NO WAY they will EVER “get rid of all guns.” There will ALWAYS be guns in the hands of CRIMINALS, who don't obey laws or “rules.” So even if they “confiscated” (stole) all legal guns, there would still be plenty of guns left, all in the hands of the very criminals who DO the “gun crime.” They think ALL (legal) guns should be in the hands of cops and government agents, and that will be a utopia. What it will BE is a DICTATORSHIP, where the guys who HAVE the guns give orders to the ones who don't, and the ones who don't have no way of objecting. Meanwhile the criminals (including the ones with badges) will; be “going wild” taking advantage of the fact that NOBODY has a gun, with which to oppose them. They SAY their goal is to “stop gun crime.” But really, it is to make SELF-DEFENSE illegal. (Just common sense)
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Gary Varvel is my favorite editorial cartoonist, for a good reason. He hits it right on the head very often. This particular cartoon is a perfect illustration of how life IS. A sign saying, “Gun Free Zone” full of bullet holes. A perfect illustration of the STUPIDITY of thinking a law will keep people from doing what they want. That's why there are cops. To arrest those who ignore laws. Who, with INTELLIGENCE, believes a CRIMINAL will not bring his guns into a “gun-free zone?” An anti-gun freak, that's who! They have so little intelligence, I'm surprised most of them are still alive. But they DO have enough intelligence to HIRE their gun-carriers. Most of them go about behind a WALL of ARMED “security.” But us “peasants” can't afford to hire people to carry our guns for us (we can't expect the government to pay for it). So we need to be armed, ourselves, so we can start on an “even playing field” (one of the liberals' favorite mottoes) with the ILLEGALLY-armed criminals, who obey NO laws. (Gary Varvel)
Knives kill more people than do guns. Knives kill people FIVE TIMES more often! Is it time to pass “knife control laws?” CAN they pass knife control laws? Cars kill more people than do guns. Time for “car control laws?” Many liberals will think so, in both cases. They usually blame the inanimate object, and not the human being who USES it to kill people. That's how stupid they are. Instead of making laws to discourage the use of GUNS in crime, they pass laws (that don't work) to disarm EVERYBODY, lawbreakers and the law-abiding, alike, thereby making honest people who DO obey laws “sitting ducks” for ILLEGALLY-armed criminals. This illustrates the flawed thinking they display, that gets people killed. (The Federalist)
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
“Fingerprint databases; statist licensing schemes; hefty fees; the never-ending bureaucratic application and reapplication process; plastic-coated permission slips. Sometimes it seems the roadblocks and regulations anti-gun activists and their political minions have thrown up to discourage law-abiding citizens from carrying a concealed firearm are endless.” It almost seems they do that on purpose. Guess what? THEY DO. They can't just BAN GUNS. So they put up all kinds of “hoops” for us to “jump through” before they, in their “goodness,” give us their PERMISSION to do what is our constitutional RIGHT. That earlier quote came directly from an e-mail I got from Dudley Brown, of “Rocky Mountain Gun Owners,” and it's very correct. It's their way of MINIMIZING the number of people able to exercise that constitutional right. (RMGO)
Breaking into a house owned by a retired Marine. Four thugs learned that lesson recently, when they did just that. Good gun training says that you should never shoot unless a threat is verified. When he opened his door, a thug pointed a gun at him. Threat verified. That Marine, who wisely had his gun in his hand, slammed the door shut and fired several times through the door. Fortunately for the “bad guys,” they had all moved out of the way and were not hit. But they fled, and were “scooped up” by the cops soon after. Chris Barrientos, the only adult among them, was taken to jail. The three minors' names have not been released. The knock on the door came at almost 2 AM, so it was suspicious, which is why he had his gun in his hand. Being a Marine (there is no such thing as a “former Marine”) he was ready. Which is why he didn't become a victim. Islamic terrorists should take note, for later use when they consider killing innocent people in America. There are lots of “retired Marines” in this country. (Western Journalism)
Monday, October 5, 2015
Talk about OBAMA'S “finessed numbers!” They put out the results of a “study” that purported to show that 86% of “mass shootings” happened OUTSIDE of “gun-free zones,” when they KNEW that was a bald-faced lie. To get that number, they included “home invasions,” which were NOT “mass shootings.” (Or only "technically, and just barely--if more than four are killed, they call it a "mass shooting").. This is the kind of thing you can EXPECT from people like the ”Everytown for Gun Safety” crowd. If they can't get true figures to back up their phony claims (and they can't), they MAKE THEM UP as they go along. We catch them doing it all the time, but they ignore that and go right on citing their phony figures as if we hadn't said a word. They have to do that because there ARE no REAL figures to back their play. They know it, so they LIE. (Breitbart)
If you work for this prosecutor, you can't have a gun, period—not even at home. In Nassau County, NY, the prosecutor has banned his assistant prosecutors (and all other employees, I guess) from even OWNING a gun at home, much less carry one in their jobs. This when some prosecutors are in a position to make deadly ENEMIES of many felons by sending them to prison, some of which, I KNOW, blame the prosecutor and the cops for the trouble they got themselves into, and want to hurt them. To disarm these people is a tragic and ignorant mistake, but one I expect in an area largely peopled by liberals, New York. For some reason, that will get people killed. Liberals are adamantly AGAINST self-defense, in any form. They don't care how many innocent people get killed by the stupid laws they make. As long as they're safe behind their hired armed guards. (Second Amendment Insider)
Sunday, October 4, 2015
Whenever a “crazy” shoots up a school, or somewhere else guns are banned, they blame the GUN, not the man. They come out and demand that more of the same useless “gun laws” that have been made for years by short-sighted people who can't think straight have been making. Politicians listen, and then go out and make more useless laws that do nothing but make “sitting ducks” of innocent citizens who then have no defense, and soon some other idiot goes out and gets a gun in one of many ILLEGAL ways, and goes on a shooting spree. Then somebody closely connected with somebody in the shooting demands more of those useless laws, and get them. Then it happens again. And again. And again. In the Oregon shooting it is the father of the shooter who is demanding more of the same, useless laws. In the case of Gabby Giffords (after Jared Laughner scrambled her brains with a bullet in Arizona) even started her own anti-gun organization with the help of her ex-astronaut husband, to demand more useless gun laws.
There have been many other examples, but I won't bore you with them. Suffice it to say, ALL of them have set their sights on the GUN, which is an “easy target,” but which is not at fault. Without the hand of a fool pulling the trigger, a gun can't harm ANYBODY. But NOBODY ever suggests punishing the USE of a gun in a crime. It's ALWAYS the gun. What to do about the “crazies” is another question, to which I don't think there is an answer. Making LAWS against gun ownership is useless,. They ALWAYS get their guns. No matter what laws you make, they WILL always get their guns. They need to simply TAKE NOTICE when such a crazy “sends up a signal” that he/she is thinking about killing a bunch of people, as most of them do, and make some laws that allow the “authorities” to do something about them BEFORE they kill a bunch of people. The real solution is to allow honest people to be armed and to defend themselves. Maybe then such crazies would be shot, themselves before they could kill as many people. But the “anti-gun fools” won't even entertain that idea. (The Blaze)
Former White House staffer and current Chicago mayor, Rahm Emmanuel once famously said (which I'm sure he didn't mean to become common knowledge), “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Which is one reason there'll never be a mass shooting, no matter what the circumstances, without a general call from all liberals (and some conservatives) for more and tighter gun control. Never mind the laws they always make do NOTHING to “stem gun violence” and ALWAYS further erode the right to self defense (and to own and carry the means to that end, a gun, that is guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States). Mass shootings (always in their “gun-free zones”) are increasing. Shootings breed more shootings, and more shootings breed even more shootings. Politicians ALWAYS blame the gun, being completely ignorant of the fact that it is the PEOPLE who need to be controlled, NOT the guns. Will that ever change? Probably not. Politicians aren't smart enough. They think if they can “get rid of guns,” killing will stop. It's an impossibility, but they won't accept that. Even though all they have to do is go back a few years when there were no guns to find out that people who want to kill will ALWAYS find a way, if they have to use their bare hands.
Will they EVER start making laws to punish the USE of a gun in a crime? Not likely. They already have some, but they don't enforce them. They use them as “bargaining chips” to get convictions in other crimes. Then they “toss them.” They need to make laws to prevent that, but they'll never know that. They're incompetent, and will stay that way. Newcomers will “take tips” from those already there, and the kind of laws they always make, they will CONTINUE to make, they will not “solve” anything, and the fight will continue. At least in this country, there still IS one impediment to simply BANNING GUNS altogether, which they pretty much did in Australia to the INCREASE of gun violence in general. But, like our politicians, they look for OTHER REASONS for that increase so they can ignore their own ignorance in the matter. So we're safe from COMPLETE gun bans in this country until they gain the strength to repeal the Second Amendment, or properly misread it, and they're working on that. One day they will succeed,and we will have lost the most valuable thing we ever had. The right to “keep and bear arms.” A dictatorship will soon follow after we're completely disarmed (except, of course, for the criminals). (Town Hall)
Saturday, October 3, 2015
Australia has all but TOTALLY banned guns in the hands of anybody but the government. I thought that was supposed to stop ALL gun violence there. The “gun-grabbers” told us so! I guess that was a lie, just like all the other lies they tell us. In Australia, where guns are BANNED, a 15-year-old kid shot and killed a cop, right after Obama touted Australia as a “gun-free utopia.” What the hell is WRONG with these incompetent fools? How did this son of radicalized Islamic terrorists get a gun? Probably with his parent's help, while they probably got it with then help of the local Imam. The kid walked right into a police station, one place that is supposed to be safe, and murdered a policeman. Of course, that cop was probably armed,but didn't expect any trouble from a kid, so was taken by complete surprise. That's what Islamic terrorists do. Sneak up and “:blind-side” you. Other kids killed the kid, which will probably create a “stink” from liberals about killing a kid, ignoring what he had just done. The kid's family, who probably knew what he was about to do, have “flown the coop.” Cops are hunting them. But like roaches when the lights come on, they have “scurried away.” Have you read about this in the liberal media? You probably won't. (Twitchy)
Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke surprised everybody on Fox when he answered a question asked of an Obama mouthpiece about what laws could be changed to stop things like yesterday's college shooting from happening. I don't think it was the answer Megyn Kelly was looking for though. He told them both that the answer was to allow American citizens to be armed in their own defense. That it was stopped (too late for nine people) when a “good guy with a gun” showed up, in the person of a police officer. What if there had BEEN an armed STUDENT (or more than one) already there who could have “taken him out” before he could kill nine people? Gun-control activists completely ignore such comments. It's not in their milieu. They just can't see the easy solution. They're “hell-bent” on DISARMING all Americans (except for the criminals, of course) and nothing else will satisfy them. It scares them to think of a room full of armed people. They think people will “go crazy” over a wrong test answer if they were armed. They don't know that there ARE a lot of people out there ILLEGALLY armed, simply because they DON'T (usually) “go nuts” at the slightest provocation. Most are gang members, almost all are crooks, who ALL go armed, and none of whom are LEGALLY armed, because most of the gang members are too young. (The Blaze)
Friday, October 2, 2015
As usual, the stupid laws anti-gun fools come up with failed again. There's a good reason for that. Does anybody know of a “mass shooting” that happened in OTHER than a gun-free zone? I know of one. Some time ago a fool tried to "shoot up” a GUN STORE. Damned fool! The only guy who got shot (except for the clerk) was the “shooter.” Why? Because almost everybody (including the clerk) had a gun and made “Swiss cheese” out of him. He won't rob another gun store. Not because he learned a lesson, because he's dead. Gun registrations don't work. That's another “flight of fancy” by the gun-grabbers. Yes. MAYBE a shooter can be identified by his (or her) name being on such a list, IF he/she bothers to get on one. People who plan on doing “bad things” with guns usually don't get their guns legally. Even so, all those lists do is (maybe) tell you who did the shooting AFTER the killing happens. AFTER the crime has “gone down.” The cops can't stop them because they're usually MINUTES away. The cops in the Oregon shooting got there quickly and put an END to the shooter, but not until AFTER he had killed NINE students and wounded 7 others. GREAT! Now they can “document” the crime, remove the bodies, and figure out, in exquisite detail, what happened. But NINE PEOPLE are still dead. In Chicago, they have some of the tightest “gun laws” anywhere, but they also have one of the highest violent crime rates in the nation. The courts routinely throw some out for being “too tight.”
Then they go out and quickly make almost identical laws and enforce them until the courts declare them unconstitutional, too. That's because there's NO PUNISHMENT for lawmakers who violate the Constitution, except for the law being thrown out. What's WRONG with these people? They make laws that simply DISARM honest, reliable people (they're the only ones who OBEY their laws) and make of them “sitting ducks” for people who don't care about breaking the law. The answer is simple. Let innocent, reliable people arm themselves. When enough lawbreakers are killed by their intended victims, other lawbreakers (who are basically cowards) will go into less violent crime. As the number of killers decreases, and there are fewer armed criminals, problem solved. Then ENFORCE the laws that ADD TIME to a sentence for a crook who uses a gun in the commission of a crime, instead of using those laws as “bargaining chips” to get convictions in other crimes. Then, instead of "lazy law enforcement, they MIGHT keep illegal shooters off the streets for a longer periods of time. Meanwhile, people might just “take notice” of “red flags” that result in such shootings. In most of these shootings, there WERE such “red flags,” but they were ignored. (NBC News)