It Didn't Work

Chicago put 1,000 extra cops on the streets in hopes of “stemming gun violence” over the Memorial day holiday. But it didn't work, as it never works with MOST of their actions to “stem gun violence” in Chicago. 52 people were shot during this period, and seven of them died, in spite of the increased police presence. One day, Chicago politicians might wake up to reality, that they need to do something about their gang problem, and that will reduce gun violence tremendously, But I doubt that will ever happen. It seems that ignorance is a requirement to BE a Chicago politician. One victim was a 15-year-old boy shot in the back in a drive-by shooting. He was killed, and his sister was wounded in the attack. Chicago will probably never check, but if they did, they'd probably find either a gang membership for this boy, or a refusal to join a gang as a reason for killing him. There was some action in that direction as they raided some gang hideouts and confiscated some guns. But it was apparently not enough. (Daily Caller)

Making Guns Useless

That seems to be the goal in every anti-gun fool law made. A new law in New York is no different, in that it make guns harder to aim by forcing a harder trigger pull supposedly to keep children from being able to pull the trigger hard enough to fire it. What it, in fact, does is make it impossible for ANYBODY to hit the broad side of a barn with it, and that gets them killed. This bill is the brainchild of Dumocrat (of course) Jose Serrano and supported exclusively by other Dumocrats. They actually think this law will SAVE lives. But, like all the rest of their stupid laws, it will only get innocent people killed, as criminals bring their ILLEGAL guns, most of which were made outside of New York, to take advantage of New Yorkers who are saddled with these unreasonable requirements in the manufacture of their guns. It gives the criminals a significant advantage, and that means innocent lives. Ten pound trigger pulls will also be required on the guns the cops use, which will also limit the accuracy of THEIR guns, getting more of them killed. (Oath Keepers)

"Ban Memorial Day!"

I swear, the anti-gun fools will try ANYTHING in their efforts to violate the Constitutional prohibition on laws that “infringe” on our right to be armed in self defense. Now the cops in Chicago (the “gun violence” capital of the country at all times) are blaming Memorial Day for an increase (over the usual) in gun violence on that day, as if it were at fault, rather than the gangs that are continually at war with each other, and most of whom are NOT “licensed carriers.” In fact, most gang members are too young to be legally allowed to have a gun, under ANY gun law, but do, anyway. If they'd “wake up” and crack down on gangs, maybe they could reduce gun violence in Chicago a little bit. But apparently, they aren't smart enough to realize that basic truth. They're putting 1,000 more officers on the street, to REACT to the gun violence that occurs on that day. (Fox 2 Now)

How Gun-Haters Think

One woman who survived a rape attempt and later became an effective activist against disarming people like herself got a message recently from an anti-gun fool. It reads in part, “Shania: yiou (sic) shouldn't have a gun because you are a danger to yourself and others.” What kind of STUPID reasoning he uses to get to that assumption, I don't know. He goes on to say that if he dated her and she grew tired of him she would just pull out her gun and shoot him. If she were stupid enough to date this fool, she should probably shoot herself. Again, what he writes shows his abysmal IGNORANCE. Then he goes on into a silly tirade, using language I wouldn't use with many misspellings and typos (I separate the two because many of the misspellings are due to lack of intelligence, rather than being “ham-handed” at the keyboard. This is the kind of “intelligence” (or lack thereof) we would expect to find among anti-gun fools, and the only thing he does well is display his abysmal stupidity. (Gun Free Zone)

Preferring Criminals

In California, they just passed a measure in the legislature that shortened the sentences for convicted violent criminals who committed crimes with guns. This confirms what I've been thinking, all along. That Dumocrats prefer the criminals to the law-abiding people. These are the same Dumocrats who moan and whine about how bad GUNS are, and then they make sure there are many more armed violent criminals out on the streets. Sen. Stephen Bradford (D-of course) says he introduced the bill after a 17-year-old who was in a car involved in a drive-by shooting but didn't shoot a gun said because he didn't shoot a gun, even though he was part of the gang that did the shooting, he was innocent. Have you ever heard of a criminal in prison who DIDN'T declare his innocence? I thought the law said that everybody involved in such things was guilty, whether or not he fired a shot. This is a good example of how Dumocrats coddle criminals, all over, and in California more than most. It's just a little more obvious there. (Daily Caller)

Gun Control Is Illogical

They call their silly laws “common sense gun control,” but they are neither. They are not common sense, nor are they gun control. Their basic premise is illogical, that the way to self defense is to disarm yourself in the face of the millions of ILLEGAL guns already out there in the hands of criminals, crazies, and now Islamic terrorists. You tell them that, but they don't hear you. It's like throwing a rock at a boulder. It just bounces off their heads without discernible effect. Gun-free zones are their worst invention.

They take away from honest, law-abiding people the right to be armed in self defense, while the “bad guys” just ignore them and bring their guns, anyway. When they're intent on serious crimes like murder and robbery, they're not concerned with a piddling law (or “policy”) that says they can't bring a gun into a certain area. In fact, they SEEK OUT such areas, because they know law-abiding people will docilely leave their own guns elsewhere, so they won't have to face the guns in the hands of the citizens and can do their dirty work without opposition.

The gun free zone is bad because it forces people to leave their guns elsewhere, while the “bad guys” ignore them. That gets people killed, but the anti-gun fools don't care. They fool themselves into thinking that they're “doing something good, by getting rid of guns in a certain area.” But they don't. They only tell the criminals where they can more easily victimize law-abiding people. And they take full advantage of it. Known mass shooters themselves will tell you they SELECT gun-free zones like schools in which to do their dirty work because they can be pretty sure they will not be facing a gun in the hands of one of their intended victims, (Just common sense)

Total Ignorance On Guns

The Minnesota Legislature is considering legislation that would eliminate all licensing requirements for people to be allowed to carry guns for self defense. Many anti-gun fool legislators say “allowing people to freely carry guns is unwise.” How do they think they're going to STOP criminals from carrying guns? They can make all the laws they want to stop the law-abiding from carrying guns to defend themselves against those CRIMINALS who ignore “gun laws,” and they're not going to be able to eliminate guns from the picture. If this country announced to the world that it was getting rid of ALL means of self defense, what fo you think would happen? Other countries, who wish to 'take us over,” would then move in and do so. The same is true on a local level. If ALL law-abiding people were barred from having guns, the CRIMINALS (who ignore laws) would “take over” and nobody could stop them. I think that's the real purpose of the anti-gun fools: to make it easier for the criminals to take over. They CAN'T be stupid enough to really believe the swill that the way to defend ourselves is to disarm ourselves, leaving us DEFENSELESS against the onslaught of CRIMINALS who wish us ill and want to TAKE what we own. Their professing their wish to "stop gun violence" is ignorance personified, if they think disarming us is the way to that, leaving us with the former. (Duluth News Tribune)

They Call It "Common Sense"

Anti-gun fools call their stupid gun laws “common sense gun laws,” but they're ANYTHING but common sense. They simply reflect the abject STUPIDITY of the lawmakers who THINK it is “common sense” to make yourself DEFENSELESS against all the ILLEGAL guns already out there, in the hands of criminals, crazies, and even Islamic terrorists (a repetition, there). If their laws WERE “common sense laws,” they wouldn't have to describe them that way in an obvious (to intelligent people, anyway) attempt to fool us. Their idea that taking away the means to self defense is the way to attain self defense is TOTAL IGNORANCE. It is NOT “common sense,” in any fashion. People who buy into that stupidity are stupid, themselves, not to recognize the contradiction therein. Then there's the simple fact that their "common sense" is unconstitutional. (The News Tribune)

Break Out the Guns

Great Britain is famous for having the biggest UNARMED police force in the world. But when real danger is imminent, they're quick to “break out the guns,” as witness their response to the bombing at a rock concert in Manchester that killed 19 (one of them an eight-year-old girl) and wounded 119. Today, everywhere you look, there are cops and soldiers bristling with firepower. They are not going to make the same mistake made in France where the unarmed cops were seen cowering behind their cars while Islamic terrorists went about killing people within their sight. Thus, the British displayed the fallacy of having unarmed police doing a dangerous job WITHOUT adequate tools with which to defend themselves. They famously (or infamously) deny their citizens the right to have and use the tools of self defense, as well as many COPS. But when REAL danger strikes, the guns come out. (Daily Mail)

What's Their Point?

The Huffington Post says, “The NRA is in denial about the slowing of gun sales since Trump's election.” They say it as if that was significant. It's not. In fact, reduced gun sales because of Trump's election is absolutely NOT unexpected, since people are no longer afraid their gun rights are going to be further restricted or taken away entirely under Trump. So they're not buying guns in such high numbers as they were under Obama. So what? And I don't think the NRA is “in denial” when they report no significant decrease in gun sales. They're just reporting REAL numbers, instead of the phony ones put out by the anti-gun fools such as the Huffington Post. I think this is just them trying to “take a victory lap” to which they are not entitled. (Huffington Post)

"There Oughta Be A Law!"

There oughta be a law against people bringing their guns into churches! They're places of worship, not violence! A man in Kansas City came into a church and shot the greeter in the head. He (the greeter, not the shooter) was taken to the hospital and is thankfully expected to survive. “MOMS Against Guns” (or something like that) are dancing in the blood of the victim, as they are wont to do. Wait—there IS a law against people bringing guns into churches! You mean this guy ignored that law? Golly gee! I thought people OBEYED laws! (sic) Seems like their “common sense gun laws” aren't very “common sense,” after all. But don't tell them that. Their minds are made up, so don't confuse them with facts. The pastor says church members are safe (really?), that he and other members did what they could to be sure of that, without detailing what they did. But that greeter might disagree. Cops say the shooter is “in custody.” (Fox 4 KC)

They Don't Get It

Many older people who profess to be “gun people” are disturbed by the “change” in the NRA from largely promoting hunting and sport shooting to “warlike” guns with “camo-like” finishes instead of “contoured fine wooden stocks and elegant inlays and engraving.” They just don't get the whole reason the Second Amendment was such an important part of the Constitution. The Founders weren't as much concerned with hunting and sport shooting rights as they were with the American people (all of them) being part of a “militia” the government could “call up” in the event of an emergency and they wanted them to bring their own guns so the government (which at the time was small and weak compared to now) would not have to pay to provide them. It's that simple, but the anti-gun fools want you to believe otherwise, that the Second was to preserve hunting and shooting sports. Such was the furthest thing from their minds. (Shall Not Be Questioned)

Another Gun Buyback

In Los Angeles there are 70 guns now “out of the picture” for criminal use. Hooray! Now the criminals there will have only a few million ILLEGAL guns to use in victimizing honest citizens while they use the money they gained in that buyback to buy new guns that work. The fools who sponsor those buybacks don't realize that money is fungible. Which means the money they get for old, mostly non-usable guns they “turn in” can be used to buy the NEW guns they need to be able to keep intimidating honest citizens. And the lawlessness goes right on, unabated. Then the cops do another gun buyback, and do it all over again. They just can't understand that their aim at the GUNS is a faulty aim, and they should be aiming at the USE of the guns. They'll never learn. (Breitbart)

The "Gun-Free Zone" Myth

The anti-gun fools would like for all America to be a “gun-free zone,” in spite of the fact that “gun-free zones” are known “killing zones” that are sought out by those who want to kill people, or just rob them. This is PROVEN by the unalterable fact that MOST “mass shootings” occur IN “gun-free zones,” and there is no lack of gun violence performed in “gun-free zones” everywhere. In California, they passed a law allowing guns on campus, IF the school approved. Out of 977 schools in the state, only FIVE allowed them. Now they want to pass a law taking even that authority away from “school authorities.” They seem to be frightened of the whole idea of people carrying their guns legally on campus. Never mind that many people already carry their guns ILLEGALLY on campus. These laws are like all the other anti-gun fool laws, in that they only apply to those who OBEY laws while the REAL threats do NOT obey laws. (Orange County Register)

Carrying It Too Far

The anti-gun fools commonly carry their fiction too far, as in suspending children from school for chewing pop tarts into a rough shape of a gun or bringing a TOY gun to school. Playing “cops and robbers” using their FINGERS as a gun, or drawing a PICTURE of a gun. Now I've heard it all. A magazine nobody has ever heard of, called, Popsugar Magazine is now telling parents they need to stop their kids from playing with WATER guns, because that “normalizes,” in their minds, real guns. Talk about “going off the deep end!” The writer of the article, whose mother allowed NO guns in her house, says, “Guns are not innocent, even if they are made of plastic and only shoot water.” How STUPID is that? She sees only the bad things about guns, ignoring the guns' ability to keep people alive. Which is common with anti-gun fools. Does she think even COPS shouldn't have guns, because they're “evil?” Of course, she has no problem with “water squirters” if they don't LOOK like a gun. Stupid! Even if they don't LOOK like a gun, the kids are pretending they ARE, whether or not they LOOK like a gun, and are shooting each other with them. (Breitbart)

A Damfool "Study"

The anti-gun fools try everything they can to make gun owners look foolish. Now they're citing a flawed “study” at the University of Colorado School of Medicine that says if a teenager has guns in his home, or even in a friend's home, he's at higher risk for mental problems. On what they base that amazing result, I don't know. And I'll bet they don't know, either. This smacks of them “making it up,” which anti-gun fools do on a regular basis. And where better to find anti-gun fools than in a university? Of course, the “study” ignores the unalterable fact that MOST teenagers who have a close association with guns are in a street gang, and it is these who are responsible for the highest amount of “gun violence,” and that has nothing to do with guns in the home. Of course, the source is a known liberal outfit. (Colorado Public Radio)

"Self Defense: A Bizarre Premise"

That's what the NY Times says, anyway, again showing their complete ignorance about the real world. What the hell do they think guns are FOR, anyway? They aren't MADE for criminals to use in victimizing people. When they do, they're misusing them. They're angry that 11 states have passed laws to allow “concealed carry” on campuses. Of course, as usual, they got the number wrong when they reported it. They said it was 10 states. They talk about the “risks” in allowing “concealed carry” on campus, completely ignoring the unalterable fact that people carry guns on campus ILLEGALLY, every day. As usual again, they decry people's ability to handle guns safely, again ignoring those people who ILLEGALLY bring their guns on campus. What they're really against is people's ability to defend themselves against all the ILLEGAL guns already out there. They want us to be DEFENSELESS when thugs attack us. They deny it to their dying day, but it's undeniable. (Breitbart)

Official Constitution Violation

In New Jersey, where they have lots of financial issues already, they're studying a bill to divert money to violating the Constitution. They can't afford to fix the roads and bridges, but they want to spend money to “study” gun control as a “public health issue.” They spend a lot of taxpayer money on gun control, anyway, but, to my knowledge, this is the first time politicians have tried to make a LAW to specifically spend taxpayer money on violating the Constitution. Hopefully, the governor will veto the bill if it ever gets to his desk. One hopes he's more intelligent than the clowns who are pushing this bill. Anybody with any INTELLIGENCE knows that gang violence is at the root of their “gun problems,” but they don't bother to even LOOK at that. They have very harsh “gun laws” already that are doing NOTHING to “stem gun violence,” but they insist on making more of them for the gangs and other criminals to ignore. (NRA-ILA)

Inflating the Numbers

This is how anti-gun fools come up with the numbers they cite. They conflate separate numbers to come up with a total. Pending cases, for instance, are counted every time they appear. Since a pending case can be there sometimes for several years, and most are dismissed at the end, a “pending case” is counted THREE TIMES whether or not is ends in a conviction—which most don't. Licensed gun carriers commit crimes in fewer cases than COPS. And licensed gun owners are counted, whether or not they used their gun to kill themselves. This is just one way they get those misleading numbers they continually cite to “prove their case” to gullible people who “pay no attention to politics,” but vote, anyway. They do this on a regular basis and thus, you just can't depend on their numbers. (The Hill)

Against Self Defense

Kevin McCarthy, Democrat, California, of course, isn't satisfied that some teachers are allowed to bring their LICENSED guns to school, so they will be able to shoot back if some crazy comes in to kill a few students. He's pushing legislation to take away from administrators the power to ALLOW certain licensed shooter teachers to bring their guns to school. He says his bill “closes the loophole in the 'gun-free school' act.” He further says, “A safe learning environment is essential for our children to be successful in the classroom. That’s not possible if a school district allows armed civilians to roam California school campuses.” He does not tell us how making teachers defenseless when somebody IGNORES that “:gun free zone” and brings his ILLEGAL gun in and kills a few students accomplishes that. As with all anti-gun fools, he doesn't tell us how DISARMING people does not make them defenseless. That's apparently “above his pay grade.” As is everything else. (Breitbart)

China Knife Attack

In Changchun, China, 18 people were stabbed by an “insane” man who was only stopped when the cops arrived with their guns and shot him. Proving, once again, that lack of guns stops NOTHING in the way of violence. If somebody wants to hurt people, he will find a way. In China, guns are just not allowed for anybody but cops and other government officials. But still, 18 people are now in the hospital with all that involves. I've said, over and over, that if you take guns out of the equation, as did China, there will still be violence. But do the anti-gun fools listen? Not a chance! All they're interested in is disarming ALL the honest, law-abiding people in America. They know that will NOT get rid of the violence, but they don't care. In China, knife attacks happen often, because it's so hard to get guns. (Fox News)

How Stupid It's Become!

Cops in Oregon actually responded to a report of an “armed cat,” carrying an automatic weapon. When they arrived, they discovered it was not a gun, after all (surprise, surprise!). It was a gun-shaped BRANCH. So they gave the cat a “warning” not to do that again. I guess they hoped the cat would obey their “warning” and no longer carry around something that looked like a gun. How absolutely STUPID is that? Like “school officials” suspending a CHILD for a YEAR for having a transparent squirt-gun! Or drawing a PICTURE of a gun, or running around using his FINGER to pretend he has a gun, going, BANG, BANG! Or chewing a Pop Tart into the rough SHAPE of a gun! Such stories about the idiocies of “the authorities” are numerous as anti-gun fools PANIC at the very SIGHT of anything that even LOOKS like a gun and scream for the cops, who have REAL guns. (UPI)

What Did They Expect?

The liberal media is now crying crocodile tears abut the “gun market collapsing” after Trump got elected. They can't have it both ways, but they just can't see that. They were crying and whining before over the fact that people were buying guns in record numbers during Obama's tenure because so many people wanted to get their guns before Obama took that right away.. Now they're crying about the gun market “collapsing” after Trump got elected, and they're “surprised." The poor gun sellers! Boo, hoo! There's a reason for it that they won't talk about. People know that gun rights will be respected under Trump, so they aren't buying guns in record numbers any more. They want us to think that there's something “sinister” in the reduced gun sales—but there is NOT. It's just an expected reaction (to intelligent people) to Trump's election. (Market Watch)

Absurdity In Gun Control

The anti-gun fools are constantly working to come up with more plausible reasons to control legal access to guns. Their most recent one is to say that, “thugs who are killed while breaking into somebody's home are being denied their right to a fair trial.” It's absurd, but they don't know it. They think it's genius. Also his right to a fair trial only arises if he is ARRESTED for breaking into this guy's home. Not when he threatens the life, and very existence of the homeowner and his family. The fact that those thugs are violating the homeowner's right to be “secure in their property and papers” is ignored, as is that homeowner's right to life, which is threatened by this thug's action in breaking into his home. This is a typical twisting of things the anti-gun fools are best known for. (The Blaze)

The Usual Crap

MOMS Against Guns (or something like that) are trying to get a law passed. “In an effort to improve gun safety, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) has reintroduced The Handgun Trigger Safety Act [an already failed bill -RT], forward-thinking legislation to use new and emerging technology to prevent gun deaths,” a press release from the congressthing proclaims. “The bill would promote the development of new ‘smart gun’ technology that only allows an authorized user to fire a gun. It would also mandate that all newly manufactured handguns use this technology within five years, and that existing handguns be retrofitted with this technology within ten years.” As usual, this law would only apply to LEGAL guns, just like ALL their current laws do. All those MILLIONS of guns already out there in the hands of “bad guys” would not be affected. Only the ability of law-abiding folks to defend themselves against them would be affected..”Same old shi....stuff.” (Oath Keepers)

Stupid Headline

“ISIS Appreciates NRA'S Work.” Why is it stupid? because, like most of the things put out by liberals, it lacks logic. As in their insistence that the Russians actually HELPED Trump become president, the very idea that ISIS would WANT to face a nation of ARMED people is ABSURD. What they would really like is a nation DISARMED by their government. It would then be a “turkey shoot.” They could kill “Infidels” at will without fearing for their own lives. As usual. Liberals (anti-gun fools) paint the NRA as badly as they can because it is their biggest block in their efforts to make us all DEFENSELESS against the ILLEGAL guns already out there. ISIS would really rather NRA work toward disarming them, too. They know they'll lose many of their own lives if they try to kill an ARMED people. Naturally, they're still putting out their usual LIE that you can buy a rifle without a background check at a gun show and that “90% of Americans object to that, and LIKE gun control.” That's just as STUPID as that headline above. This article, in New York Magazine, displays “institutional ignorance."

Fewer guns, More Murderers

That's fewer LEGAL guns. That's a stat the anti-gun fools will not tout because it proves that they are on the completely wrong tack, in targeting guns, rather than people. The study was conducted by the Crime Prevention Research Center, whose dependability is legendary, while being hated by the anti-gun fools because of that. Their research can be backed up, fully, as it is with this study. Their methodology is proper. Of course, the anti-gun fools will say it is not, because that's all they have. With no proof of anything with which to back it up. The fact is, statistics PROVE that, the more LEGAL guns are out there, in the hands of law-abiding people, the fewer murders there are in any area where that is the case. They found that 54% of the counties with the LOWEST murder rates are, coincidentally, counties with the lowest percentage of tight gun laws and the highest number of legally-owned guns. (Breitbart)

They're NOT Children!

Anti-gun fools publish articles telling about lots of “children” being shot. What they don't tell you is that those “children” are up to 19 years of age and are gang members who are shooting back. The articles never say WHO is shooting at them so they can paint a picture in your mind that the ”victims” are “toddlers” dancing around in a grassy field, chasing butterflies, which is NOT the case. At age 19 they are, for all intents and purposes, ADULTS, and are, themselves, (ILLEGALLY) armed This is how they twist things to make you think things that are NOT true. Included in their “16 Children A Day Being Shot” figure are those19-year-old gang members, and they are on both sides of any shootings covered. Only THREE out of that 16 are really children, and they are usually shot by people using ILLEGAL guns—another stat they ignore. (Gun-Free Zone)

Drive-By--Big Mistake

Three thugs attempted a drive-by shooting on a licensed gun owner in Houston, Texas the other day. Big mistake. They missed him completely, but he didn't miss them. One of the thugs died at the scene, and another died at the hospital, which was their next stop. There is no word yet on the fate of the third, who is still in the hospital with serious injuries. Which proves, yet again, that what I say is true: armed citizens CAN reduce crime on the streets, if by no other way than by killing the thugs who try to victimize innocent people. At least two of these three thugs will victimize no more innocent people, and the third one will be a long time getting back to the point of being able to terrorize anybody—IF he ever does. And the crimes they would have committed will not happen. (The Blaze)

She Turned the Tables

What can a woman do when she is followed home at night and forced to let a thug into her home to rob it? Shoot him, of course! That's if she can get damfool “authorities” to LET her get a gun to use in self defense, that is. When I look at most of the laws made that are called “gun laws,” I shudder, because most of them are DESIGNED to make it hard for law-abiding people to defend themselves against the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there. Some are designed to slow down access, and others are designed to prevent access, altogether. Which makes the gun USELESS for self defense, and defeats the purpose of HAVING the gun, altogether. Thankfully, this woman's gun was not stored that way and she had easy access to it, to the chagrin of the thug. Even armed, however, you need to be “situationally aware” of your surroundings. If you see someone following you, drive to the nearest police station, or at least to a well-lighted place where a lot of people are, like an all-night gas station. Thugs usually shy away from “doing their thing” in such places. Whatever you do, stay aware of your surroundings—always. (Jenn Jaques)

A Common Story

In Great Britain, where guns are just about completely banned, even for the cops, gangs are killing each other with guns with abandon. How is this POSSIBLE? Gun laws are supposed to keep them from getting guns! Anti-gun fools keep telling us that! And it's getting worse. One gang member says he LOVES shooting people and making them run away, then going after their PARENTS and killing family members. There are more than a half MILLION illegal guns in England, many left over from WWII. But what are Britons allowed to have for self defense? A “rape whistle.” Apparently to blow while somebody is killing you. That's about as STUPID as our “gun laws,” most of which only make it EASIER for the thugs to victimize honest, law-abiding people. (America's First Freedom)

A Real Constitutional Right?

The Ninth Circuit (Circus) Court of Appeals says, we “must treat the Second Amendment as a REAL constitutional right.” What? Only the anti-gun fools have NOT. The Second IS a “real constitutional right.” It always has been, despite all the ways the anti-gun fools try to “get around it.” Their decision talks about “how to reclaim Second Amendment rights after a criminal conviction.” A question that should not even be asked. Criminals and the insane are the only people (besides terrorists) that should be kept from owning guns legally. Forever. If a person has been pardoned or otherwise had his conviction(s) expunged, he is no longer legally a criminal, and SHOULD get his gun rights back. Actually, in “real life,” the whole question is moot. A real CRIMINAL is more likely to get his gun ILLEGALLY, anyway. Criminals are funny that way. They don't OBEY laws. (Washington Post)

Nobody Shot Anybody

If guns are the “root cause” of violence, as anti-gun fools tell us, how then, could more than 80,000 gun-rights enthusiasts (many presumably armed) gather in Atlanta at the NRA Convention and nobody shot anybody? That's just one more damfool notion of the anti-gun fools disproved. Their basic assumption that criminals will obey their laws when they don't obey any others is another. All their “gun laws” do is get people killed, by making them DEFENSELESS against the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there in the hands of criminals, crazies, and Islamic terrorists. Another of their foolish notions is that if guns magically disappeared from the Earth, there'd be no suicides. Have they never heard of sleeping pills? Or knives, with which to cut their wrists? How about jumping off a tall building? (Town Hall)

Don't Mess With Texan!

In a home just north of Houston, TX, three thugs waited in the bushes for a man to come home. They pistol whipped him and forced him to let them into his home, where his wife and children were. Once inside, they lost interest in him and went about collecting goodies to steal. While they were doing that, the homeowner was able to get his own gun, and shot one of them. They “lit out for the tall timber,” with one stop on the way at a hospital for one of their number who now had a new hole in his hide. The cops arrested him there. He is expected to recover and will be jailed when he does. The others are still running and haven't been found—yet. They learned a good lesson: don't mess with a Texan. The man's wife and children were unharmed in this—physically, anyway. And the anti-gun fools keep telling us these things never happen, that legal gun owners are more likely to shoot themselves, rather than a “bad guy.” (Bearing Arms)

It Happened Again!

The anti-gun fools keep saying it doesn't happen,. But it keeps on happening, to the detriment of users of ILLEGAL guns, who go where no law-abiding people usually go, bringing their guns with them. In this case, a man walked into a bar and killed the bartender, and was, himself, killed by a “bystander” who happened to have a carry permit and his own gun. There's no telling how many others this guy would have killed, but the concealed carrier not only did away with the threat he represented to others, he saved the government a lot of money in trial costs if the shooter had been arrested and prosecuted for his crime. That's TWO good reasons for more and more people to be able to carry their own guns. This concealed carrier was in a bar with his gun. But it was not him who killed an innocent man, but he was the one who took immediate action to keep the shooter from killing anyone else. Anti-gun fools will just call this case “gun violence,” ignoring the fact that a gun ENDED the violence perpetrated by a guy with an ILLEGAL gun. (Breitbart)

"Calling Out" the NRA"

That's what California Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom thinks he's doing. He used Twitter to “call out” the NRA, and said “gun control saves lives.” Of course, he just SAID that. He didn't offer any proof. He didn't have any. He said “gun laws have won the day,” but they haven't. Even other anti-gun fools like Shannon watts, boss lady of “MOMS Against Guns” (or something like that) think “gun violence in California is out of control” .He's the typical kind of brain-dead politicians they usually elect in California. How Reagan ever got elected there, is a mystery. The NRA fired back, saying , “even Californians have the Constitutional right to be armed.” Like every anti-gun fool politician, he thinks he can “ride roughshod” over the Second Amendment—but he can't. He MAKES his unconstitutional laws, but when they get to the Supreme Court, they'll be “tossed out with the other trash,” where they belong. Unfortunately, they will have been long-enforced until then. Some people will be out a lot of money in fines, in prison, or dead because they couldn't get the means for self defense. (Breitbart)

Just Run Him Out

In the first political ad in Virginia, Democrat Lt. Governor Ralph Northam, who wants the top job, says he is “unalterably anti-gun.” That, by itself, should cost him the election, if Virginia voters were smart, but it probably won't. Because there are way too many fools that agree with him in that state. They elected Terry McAuliffe, didn't they? We need to learn that, the more anti-gun politicians we elect to office, the more we're going to have trouble keeping or obtaining the means to our own self defense, a gun. What makes these politicians think they can make unconstitutional laws and get away with it, I don't know. They figure every way they can to get around the Constitution, not just on gun issues, but others, too. He's also in favor of gay “marriage,” and I'll bet he's in favor of “transgender rights,” too (men in women's restrooms and changing rooms if they think they're women that day). He's probably in favor of all the liberal damfool ideas. (Richmond Times-Dispatch)

California Tight Gun Laws

Did nothing to stop the rash of gun crime that came right after they were passed. Proof, again, that gun laws, as we know them, don't work. Even so, they're insisting on even more of them. As this is written, “authorities” won't even tell us how many were killed in the shootings in Whittier, La Mirada, and Norwalk. Nor will they speculate on whether or not the shooters used LEGAL guns, even if they DID keep such numbers. In San Diego, where it is nearly impossible to get a carry permit, a man went into a birthday party where he knew nobody and started killing people at random, over the breakup with his girlfriend, who was not at the party and also knew nobody there. In Fresno, a Muslim went on a killing spree, killing white men, after killing a security guard the week before. Californians CAN'T GET PERMITS TO CARRY FOR SELF DEFENSE, but criminals never have any problem getting their ILLEGAL guns. Anti-gun fools know this, but it doesn't seem to make any difference as they keep making their USELESS gun laws that get people killed. (Totally Right)

Dumbest Anti-Gun Argument

“Guns should be banned because they deny 'due process rights' to the dead criminals.” Never mind the right to life and liberty for their victims! Anti-gun fools can really come up with STUPID arguments! From their basic concept that CRIMINALS, Who obey NO laws, will obey a law that says they can't use guns in their crimes to “gun free zones,” that expect them to obey those rules when they obey no others, their ideas are uniformly stupid, and should be rejected at every point. Their entire argument is based on a simple fallacy: that criminals will obey their laws. That this gets many people killed goes without saying, but that seems to elude the anti-gun fools. (Liberty Park Press)

Defeating the Purpose

Having a gun in the house is usually for self defense. Many people keep their guns in a safe, somewhere out of the way, which defeats the purpose of having a gun in the house, because that is DESIGNED to make it difficult to get it into operation quickly—and if you can't get your gun into operation within a few seconds when a gun-wielding intruder threatens you, what GOOD is it? Many jurisdictions REQUIRE your guns to be in such safes. ALL the current gun laws are DESIGNED to make it harder for you (not the criminal) to be able to defend yourself. Here is a “gun safe” you can use that allows INSTANT access to your guns if you have the “key” while functioning AS a “gun safe.” And it isn't usually hidden away in a back room, somewhere. It can be right there when you need it. (Home Defense News)

"Illogical Betond Words"

Anti-gun fools call allowing adult college students, school staff, and teachers to bring their LEGAL guns on campus “illogical beyond words.” 100 years ago CHILDREN brought their guns to GRADE school, and few of them randomly killed other students. But what IS “illogical beyond words” is keeping them from being able to defend themselves against people who bring their ILLEGAL guns on campus to kill people they can pretty well be sure won't have their own guns for self protection. That's the fallacy in ALL today's “gun laws.” They only affect the people who OBEY laws by keeping law-abiding people from being able to defend themselves. All their “laws” do is get people killed. Meanwhile, those who would do us harm bring their guns on campus without a problem—until they kill a few people, while the people who OBEY laws just DIE. (NY Daily News)

Really That Stupid?

Sen. Chris Murphy (Democrat, of course) thinks his background check bill would have stopped the Sandy Hook massacre. Is he really THAT stupid? Does he really think buying a gun LEGALLY is the only way people who want to shoot up “gun-free zones” get their guns? In a Huff Post op-ed he said that shootings in gun free zones where guns are not supposed to be brought prove that more laws against guns should be made. How does he account for the fact that shooters IGNORE the laws that are already out there? He says the American people WANT a background check system that is not full of holes. No, they don't, Senator. YOU and your befuddled fellow anti-gun fools want that. Intelligent people do NOT, because such laws do NOTHING to reduce gun crime, usually done by people who do NOT have licenses to carry and use their ILLEGAL guns. (Breitbart)

Anti-Gun Rally Fizzles

It's been happening a lot lately. Anti gun fools make big noises about a BIG rally to oppose those “wascally gun wovers,” and it fizzles—because not nearly as many folks are interested in their flights of fancy as they thought. In one case, only 15 people showed up. In this case, they crowed about “showing the NRA what's really happening in gun control by “confronting them” in a park almost a MILE away from the NRA venue in Atlanta where 80,000 people attended. Unfortunately, only about 75 people from the several anti-gun fool organizations showed up for their "rally in the park.". The crowd was so thin they even gave away some of their T-shirts to the homeless that frequented that park to make it LOOK like more people showed up than did. But most of them were quite disinterested. This kind of thing should cause them to wake up to the fact that fewer and fewer people are interested in their scam, but it won't. Fanatics don't learn from experience. Pretty soon they won't have enough money to put on their “shows.” Bloomberg has spent so much on their “failed mission” that HE might even run out of money. Or at least quit throwing good money after bad, with no results. (Bearing Arms)

Road Rage Shootings

The NY Times ran a story about a significant rise in “road rage shootings” numbering 1,319 during a 3-year period, resulting in at least 354 wounded and 136 killed, according to the Trace, which they consider a legitimate news source (Intelligent people do not). As usual, nowhere in the report is there ANY mention about whether or not the shooters were concealed carriers. People who are sufficiently responsible as to GET a concealed carry permit don't usually just shoot people at random. That is the main problem with ALL reports of this kind. Most of the shooters carry ILLEGAL guns, about which they can do NOTHING with a law making it harder for law-abiding people to have guns to defend themselves against such attacks. If many of these victims had had their own guns, many of them would not have been victimized. Though the anti-gun fools would have reported it simply as “more gun violence” without mentioning it was in self defense. I wonder how many of their 1,319 shootings WERE in self defense against illegal guns? They didn't mention that, either. (NY Times)