Shot By Everybody

This crook picked the wrong convenience store to rob, at the very worst time—for him. There were four armed cops in line when he entered, wearing a motorcycle helmet disguise, and tried to rob the store. Whereupon all four cops shot him, making him resemble a bloody piece of Swiss cheese. It is not known (to us) if he survived, but I doubt he did. Cops shoot to kill. This again points up the reality that having more people out there, who are NOT criminals, who are armed, can make all the difference when an ILLEGALLY armed criminal comes in to do his dirty work. Anti-gun fools just won’t even entertain the idea of arming the law-abiding. They think (wrongly) that the very fact of being armed will make them go rabidly mad and start killing people over parking spaces and fender-benders. Of course, they ignore the fact that ILLEGAL gun carriers are doing that, now. These people are supremely short-sighted if they think they can stop crime by doing away with guns. OR that that CAN do away with guns. Their entire way of thinking is incorrect. You can’t stop people who want to do ill by making a law against their TOOLS. They just then get them illegally, which they usually do, anyway. (Sandra Rose)

"Come From Other States"

That’s what NJ Governor Murphy says about the illegal guns that are so proliferant in New Jersey, in spite of their tight anti-gun laws that do NOTHING to limit gun violence, and never will. Which, of course, is an EXCUSE to divert attention from the fact that he has NO IDEA of what to do to “combat gun crime.” Yes. Many come from other states. But many come from New Jersey, too. Criminals get their ILLEGAL guns wherever they can, In New Jersey, or out. For him to use that as an excuse just showcases his incompetence as governor. ALL guns not manufactured in New Jersey come from other states, whether they’re legal, or illegal. That’s a given. It has always been true, and his people have been UNABLE to stop them from coming in, which is on HIM. Politicians are very good at diverting blame for their own inadequacies, and this is one way they do it. Murphy has repeatedly promised to make his state a “showcase” for gun control. By making even more useless laws that are routinely ignored by the bad guys. Good words. Mean nothing. They are “politician speak.” Chicago is the current “showcase” for gun control, and a recent weekend saw 70 people shot, and 12 killed by guns. (NJ)

"We Must Ban Hammers!"

And clubs! And anything that can be USED as a club, like one of those metal flashlights the cops carry and are so easy to buy, that are so heavy! And heavy ash trays! And vases! And hands and feet! Many people have been killed with all of these things, so we must ban them! How about politicians’ mouths? People have been killed by what politicians SAY! We must ban ANYTHING that is capable of self-defense! FBI figures show that more people have been killed and injured by hammers and other kinds of clubs than guns. And even more people were killed by “personal weapons” such as hands, fists, feet, than with rifles and shotguns COMBINED! What about cars? More people have been killed and injured by cars than by ANY kind of weapon! Should we ban cars? So how do we stop people from getting killed? Ban everything? Or find some way to stop killings before they happen? Gun-free zones certainly don’t work. Would-be mass shooters SEARCH OUT gun-free zones in which to do their shooting because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding there will not be armed. Criminals actually ADMIT that. Nor do background checks. The stories of mass shootings committed by felons who have PASSED a background check, THEN committed a mass shooting are rife. Guns are easier to get ILLEGALLY than legally. If you passed a law banning all guns (if you could), “bad guys” would still get their guns. They don’t obey laws. They’re CRIMINALS! If you banned the MAKING of guns, criminals would have a “field day” making ILLEGAL guns. There isn’t a way in HELL to stop “gun crime” with what we have, so far. So let the law-abiding have guns with which to defend themselves. That’s the ONLY solution. Yes, that would increase gun fights for a while as the law-abiding kill off the lawless who try to victimize them, reducing crime, one criminal at a time. But then, things would get better with fewer illegal guns being in use. (Breitbart)

Burglary As An Excuse

Using “improper storage” as an excuse, a New York sheriff essentially put a gun store out of business, by “confiscating” (stealing) its entire inventory “temporarily.” Yes, there have been an inordinate number of burglaries at this store, and the sheriff says it’s the gun store’s fault for not having good enough “security.” So they took all his guns “for safekeeping.” They apparently think their storage is more secure than his. Sheriff Todd Baxter said they have “tried to work with the store to improve security, but his failure to properly secure his store has resulted in a serious threat.” Thus blaming the victim, instead of the burglars. Which is as usual. And it gives them an “excuse” to take ALL his inventory and essentially put him out of business. Chief Deputy Fowler said, “that the agency was not trying to force the shop owner out of business, but warns the path to reopening could be a lengthy one.” But won’t put the guy out of business, of course. Yeah. This situation is but one of the ways liberals make it difficult for gun sellers to do business without actually BANNING guns, which they can’t do in this country. (Guns)

No Gun, No Security

At least one judge in New Jersey thinks security guards in movie theaters shouldn’t be armed. He thinks they don’t NEED guns. What STUPIDITY! Speaking as a former private security guard, I think what I would do as an UNARMED security guard on a movie theater when some crazy comes in and decides to shoot the place up, as one did in Aurora, Colorado (less than a mile from where I was living). I’d have to hide behind the nearest solid object, and be USELESS when it comes to stopping him and saving some lives. Maybe even become a victim, myself. The whole idea of UNARMED “security” is a misnomer. All an UNARMED security officer can do is “hide and watch” while the bad things are going on, and tell somebody about it later, while the bodies are being carried out, along with the wounded. The judge who decided theater security guards do not need guns is STUPID. Too stupid to be allowed to make such decisions and have them be carried out. Theaters have been designated as “soft targets” by Homeland Security, but a judge in New Jersey denied the application for a carry permit for s theater security guard, without even holding a hearing. This in spite of the fact the application was approved by the police chief AND the management of his security company. A theater “protected” by a security guard with no gun is a “tempting target” for a criminal intent on stealing the sometimes large amounts of money that cross their lobbies. To mandate no guns for security officers is as stupid as disarming the cops. (Bearing Arms)

"Common Sense" Gun Laws

The anti-gun fools call the laws they make “common sense.” But they are ANYTHING but common sense. They create a situation where criminals and other “bad guys” can be pretty sure their intended victims will not be armed, and able to oppose them. Their “common sense” laws make it EASY for holders of ILLEGAL guns to victimize the law-abiding, who DO obey their silly, USELESS laws. Gun-free zones,” for instance: all these laws do is make it an almost sure thing that an armed law-abiding person will not be there when they come in, IGNORING the law, to kill people—UNLESS those “law-abiding people” are breaking the law and bringing their guns, too. If so, and they do shoot the shooter, they will likely end up in prison, too. Then there are the “safe storage laws,” where a gun owner must store his guns according to the DICTATES of a nameless, faceless bureaucrat who, in order to do his job, must have “access” to the private property of the person, which is a constitutional violation, because it allows that bureaucrat to do a search WITHOUT a warrant. Every anti-gun law out there ONLY applies to the law-abiding, who OBEY laws, leaving the field open to the lawbreakers, who do NOT. This is not “common sense.” It is idiocy. But I guess politicians don’t care about that, so long as they can CLAIM to be “doing something about gun crime.” Unfortunately, they are NOT. They are only making it worse. (Just common sense)

"Just Change the Rules"

In Cicero, Illinois, a “concealed carry” permit holder came to the assistance of some cops who were in a gun fight with a criminal. The police and other politicians in Cicero praised this man to the highest order. But that was just too much for the anti-gun fools at the Chicago Sun-Times, who ran a piece that said, “One heroic deed doesn’t justify bad policy,” referring to the “shall issue” policy regarding concealed carry. The first thing to note is that “shall issue” is NOT “bad policy.” And more people being able to carry guns is a “good thing,” not a bad thing, and is “good policy,” no matter what those anti-gun fools say. All liberals (and anti-gun fools are liberals, and vice-versa) say, “If it saves one life, it’s worth it,” to justify their silly policies—until something like this happens, proving their policies useless and wrong, then they say, “If it saves only one life, it’s NOT worth it,” thus “changing the rules.” In other words, if the rules don’t suit your arguments, just change them. It’s the liberal way, and Dumocrats ARE liberals. Liberals keep saying legal gun carriers do NOT save lives, while they do it, many thousands of times, every year—which they ignore. (Daily Caller)

Politicians Never Learn

Chicago is one of the worst cities to live in if you value your life, because, in spite of draconian anti-gun laws, they have one of the highest numbers of people shot in the nation. People (mostly gang members) routinely IGNORE their “gun laws” and continue to shoot one another with abandon. So Dumocrat Mayor Rahm Emanuel wants to make more of them. Never mind they don’t work worth a damn. I hate to say a politician is STUPID, but I can think of no better way to describe such stupidity as this. In just one weekend recently, 70 PEOPLE were shot, and 12 KILLED. There are WAR ZONES with fewer such reports! Anti-gun laws plainly do not work! But stupid politicians such as Rahm insist on making more and more of them, while people get killed as a result. The only people in Chicago who DON’T have guns are the law-abiding. So the lawbreakers can “run roughshod” over them with their ILLEGAL guns. I have a nephew who lives in Chicago, and I fear for him. He usually doesn’t go into the worst areas, but there’s always the chance that a gang shooting could happen even where he frequents. Those gang members shoot each other every day, not caring if they shoot and kill innocent people “by accident.” (Keep and Bear)

Sorry About That

There was no update on Friday, and there will be none on Monday. That’s because my sister is in town for a visit, which might well be her last (don’t tell her that, she wouldn’t respond well). I need time to visit with her, and her son, who is also here. He’s paying for the trip. Posts will resume on Tuesday, after I take her to the airport. 
. 

Stupid Claims

The anti-gun fools are now saying, “A good guy with a gun does not exist.” This in spite of undeniable proof that is a LIE. But they don’t care, They think if they tell that lie enough times, people (many who aren’t too bright, anyway, and that is the people to whom they appeal) will believe it. VICE ran an article that basically tried to convince us that having a gun in the house was more dangerous to the residents than anybody else. Which is typical of the STUPIDITY of anti-gun fools, who think criminals OBEY their silly laws, while the law-abiding, DO, making them “easy targets” for those who do NOT obey ANY laws. Unfortunately, there have been 760,000 defensive uses of a gun per YEAR. They try and convince us that, when a gun is drawn and no shots fired being counted does not count. But how is THAT wrong? That IS a “defensive use of a gun.” You don’t have to kill somebody to use a gun defensively. All you have to do is stop a bad guy from doing his “dirty work.” If the bad guy is so frightened at the sight of a gun in the hand of his intended victim that he will not try to continue his nefarious plans, that makes a “defensive use of a gun” even more powerful. “Good guys with guns” have proven, time after time, that the only thing that stops the bad guys is a “good guy with a gun.” That is undeniable, but anti-gun fools continue to deny it. They can’t answer the question: “Did the 760,000 “good guys with guns” in one year “not exist?” (Breitbart)

"Gun Research Without Politics"

That’s what they promise with new “research” being conducted at Arizona State University, using a $5 million dollar grant from the National Institutes of Health, one of the most anti-gun fool outfits there are. Do you think their results won’t be used politically? If you do, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn that can be yours at a song. Gun research without politics. Now THAT’S funny! Since when have you seen ANY “gun research,” on either side, that didn’t end up with politics? No matter which side the research comes down on, one side supports it, and the other side opposes it. That’s the very DEFINITION of politics. As with philosophy, you just cannot divorce gun research from politics, and to promise to do so is a bit naive. And anti-gun politicians ARE naive. They think simply passing a law against something will stop people from using it. They think if they can just get rid of guns, crime will stop. One of their most popular idiot laws is the “gun-free zone.” And many businesses also declare their property as a “gun-free zone,” telling people to leave their guns at home when they come there. It is those “zones’ where most gun crime occurs because the bad guys know the law-abiding won’t usually be armed, and able to oppose them, there. (ABC 15)

Disarmed and Defenseless

Politicians (most of them, anyway) want Americans to be DISARMED and DEFENSELESS. That is the basic purpose of all their damned fool anti-gun laws. They certainly don’t do anything to stop the bad guys from victimizing the law-abiding, who DO obey their short-sighted and stupid anti-gun laws. That’s because they (most of them) plan on coming one day for your possessions and they don’t want to meet a loaded gun in the hands of their intended victims. They’ve already begun that push with the RICO laws. Those laws were made, ostensibly to take away the money drug dealers can use to defend themselves when arrested. That’s a completely UNCONSTITUTIONAL reason, since even drug dealers and murderers are entitled to the best defense they can have. But the real reason is that, they will use them to disguise their banditry later on, by casting their thievery in a “law enforcement” disguise. (Breitbart)

Next: We Ban Cars

In Great Britain they never learned that banning the tools bad people use to kill other people never stops them. They had several major mass shootings. They don’t have a Second Amendment, so they banned guns. Then the bad guys started killing people with knives, so they banned knives. Then people started killing people with cars. Now the mayor of London wants to ban cars. They just don’t get it, no more than our own stupid politicians don’t get it. Banning the TOOLS bad guys use to victimize the law abiding NEVER stops them. They just use something else, or IGNORE your laws and use those tools, anyway. As usual, they paint their silly, USELESS laws as being “for freedom,” when they are NOT. They further limit the rights of the law abiding, while making it easier for those who IGNORE their laws to victimize the rest of us. Banning cars is the brainchild of London Mayor Sadiq Kahn, a Muslim. Which would be okay if he was thinking like a Brit, not a Muslim. He’s thinking like Muslims do in countries where they are in complete control. He is prima facie evidence of the reason why civilized people should NEVER elect a Muslim to a political office. Muslims tend to think and act like ants or bees, with a “hive mentality.” Whatever “the hive” dictates, they do. Which is why Muslims today, all over the world, are being treated like an “endangered species.” Which would not be a problem if they didn’t get taught in the Koran that it is okay to MURDER people who don’t convert to their “religion,” and that it is okay to murder their children if they do something to “dishonor” their family. Personally, I have nothing against Muslims, per se. I DO have something against Muslims who want to KILL us, or are always trying to change our ways and bring THEIR “values” to us, while FORCING us to accept it. If they leave me alone. I leave them alone. (Bearing Arms)

"Take Guns, Kill 'Em"

That’s what has happened in countless countries. They make “laws” to take the guns away from the law-abiding, making their citizens “easy targets for criminals (many of whom wear badges), then come back and make “laws” that allow the government to take money and property belonging to them. It happened in Nazi Germany, and then the Nazi government MURDERED 6 MILLION Jews, just because Hitler didn’t like Jews. “Gun confiscation holds a special place in the halls of political repression.” (Mises Wire) Then we go to the communist Soviet Union. Lenin actually called for a “citizen’s militia” when he was still working to take control, but when he got in power, it “morphed” into a powerful “militia” subservient only to “the State,”and was used to subjugate the people. “To maintain its iron grip, the Soviet Union had to turn to the most proven form of suppression — gun confiscation. On December 10, 1918, the Council of People’s Commissar mandated that Soviet citizens turn in their firearms. Failure to do so, led to criminal prosecution. Soviet gun control laws remained tight in the following decades, although the government did go out of its way to give Communist Party affiliates privileged access to firearms.” As did Hitler, in Germany. Many countries have followed this pattern, and ALL have resulted in countless deaths, at the hands of “government agents.” (Mises Institute)

Britain: "Gun Control Utopia"

Guns are effectively prohibited, even for most cops, in London, so there should be no crime, no violence, right? WRONG! Recently, in South London, in what APPEARS to be, but may not be a “gang fight,” four young teens were stabbed, one of them disemboweled, with maybe only an 8% chance of living, according to one person. Even knives are “controlled” in London, so how did these CHILDREN get their knives? The same way other criminals get their guns, of course. They IGNORE anti-gun laws (and anti-knife laws) routinely there, just like they do here. Here, those laws are unconstitutional because they are an “abridgment” on our Second amendment rights, even though the Supreme Court hasn’t yet gotten around to declaring them so. Every anti-gun law in America is unconstitutional for that reason. And they are USELESS, in that they only apply to the law-abiding, while the lawbreakers routinely ignore them. Anti-gun fools pass these laws. They don’t work. And they pass even more of them, and all they do is disarm the law-abiding, making it easier for the lawbreakers to victimize them. (Metro)

Typical Anti-Gun Lie

Anti-gun fools keep telling us that defensive uses of a gun just don’t happen. In spite of indisputable proof it DOES happen 760,000 times a year. It happened again here, as cops tried to stop an armed suspect, who put SEVEN bullets in one cop. He shot the shooter, saving that cop’s life. If you think that doesn’t happen, just ask that cop, who is still alive today, in spite of being shot SEVEN TIMES. This guy has had a “carry permit” for sixteen years, and this is the first time he has ever shot anyone. This puts the lie to another anti-gun fool claim that carry permit holders present a danger to society, since they MIGHT go on a shooting see if they’re allowed to carry a gun. Permit holders, contrary to the lies told by anti-gun fools, are NOT the problem in “gun crime.” It is the criminals, who obey NO LAWS, who are. And none of their highly touted anti-gun laws apply to them, because they obey NO LAWS. So if they want to make things better, let citizens carry their own guns, They will soon rid us of those criminals by killing them, when they try and victimize them. Reducing crime, one criminal at a time. (The Blaze)

No Crime, Take Guns

In Arizona the governor is pushing for a law that allows them to confiscate (steal) guns from legal owners if a judge “deems them” to be “dangerous,” or if they are incarcerated “on suspicion” of a crime for 21 days or have been on a “mental health incarceration” to SEE if they are mentally deficient. Conviction of a crime or a mental condition not required. Even if no such condition is found. The incarceration is sufficient. This is like the RICO laws. Under RICO, which was PASSED to deprive “rich drug barons” of the right to a proper defense by taking away their money, is now being used to “confiscate” (steal) CARS because of the most minor of crimes, suspicions only. No actual CONVICTION required for their property to be stolen by the government. The RICO laws are unconstitutional, even though they have been enforced for years without being sent to the Supreme Court for a decision. They are unconstitutional because they are DESIGNED to deprive an American citizen of his/her right to a PROPER defense against an out of control government. This law would be unconstitutional also, for the same reasons, since NO CRIME is required to deprive an American citizen of his/her Second Amendment rights, and could be enforced for DECADES before being so designated by the Supreme Court. (Cogito Ergo Geek)

Why Vote Democrat?

I can’t, for the life of me, figure out why ANYBODY of even average intelligence, would vote for a Dumocrat—ever. Dumocrats fall all over themselves to support abysmally STUPID policies, all the time. They are in favor of socialism—which is a system BASED on the THEFT of the fruits of their labors from those capable and willing to earn their own way, so they can GIVE it, UNEARNED, to those who produce NOTHING. But they still believe in it, in spite of the sure knowledge that it not only does not work, it is DESTRUCTIVE, both to the economy, and to the individual. Every city where Dumocrats run things is in trouble. Gang trouble, money trouble, “social” trouble. They make promises, but never deliver—yet gullible voters keep electing them to mess things up, even more. Look at Chicago, which is, and has been, run by Dumocrats. It is so broke it has to issue IOU’s to lottery winners. It has some of the toughest anti-gun laws in the nation (some so tough they have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court). Coupled with the highest rate of “gun crime” in the nation. They promote such really stupid things as gay marriage, that there are more than two sexes, and allowing MEN into women’s restrooms and changing rooms if they THINK they are a woman, that day. There’s a lot more, but I don’t have room for it, here. But voters in many areas keep electing them, while they complain about the results of their own policies while those gullible voters suffer. (Just common sense)

Incompetent Policing

Convicted felons can’t legally buy guns. Right? Then why did Marlin Mack, a convicted felon, PASS a background check so he could legally buy the gun he used to kill a “graduate student” during an attempted restaurant robbery? Cops found him at a “swanky hotel” later, and three cops were shot apprehending him. All with a gun he bought LEGALLY while being a convicted felon. Mack was killed in that gunfight, which is the best way to handle such people. One cop said, “He needs to be warehoused until he is old and decrepit. WRONG! Had he lived, he should have been given the death penalty. Some people just don’t deserve to be alive. Mack is one of them. Anti-gun fools say “background checks save lives.” Did they save these lives? Obviously not, as the dead bodies piled up attest. When even a convicted felon can pass one of their highly vaunted background checks and buy his guns LEGALLY, we’re ALL in trouble. And the ONLY real solution is to ARM the law-abiding so they can protect themselves, instead of DYING while waiting for the cops to arrive with their guns. Had there been ONE armed civilian in that crowd at the restaurant, maybe that “graduate student” would not have had to die. But anti-gun fools will NOT hear of this. They go right on making their USELESS laws that stop NOBODY from getting guns. If they can’t get them legally, they get them ILLEGALLY. (Truth About Guns)

Political Trickery

Don’t be surprised if you see ads being run by DUMOCRATS, in which they talk about how much they love guns. That‘s how they screw with your brain and get into office. Then they go out and sponsor all the old, tired, USELESS anti-gun laws that have never worked, and never will. They’re learning that Americans value their Second Amendment rights, and they LIE to you to get into office. That’s when they revert to their “old tricks” and try their best to make the Second Amendment moot while still telling you they aren’t doing it. They think you’re too stupid to notice. One Dumocrat said in his campaign “What I think it's going to take is people in Congress who are willing to do more than just talk, who are willing to actually work together and stay late, if it requires that, and do some things that would really produce change." As usual, he says “good words” that mean nothing. He talks about Congress “doing more than just talk,” while he has no answers to offer TO Congress on the subject, besides those tired, old laws that don’t work. At the same time, one Dumocrat candidate accused his opponent of wanting to gut Social Security and Medicare, which no Republican has ever even tried, if he was intelligent. That’s one of their usual accusations, and it is also false. I hate listening to television during campaign ad season because I know most of them are lies, or a twisting of the facts. (Business Insider)

Doesn't Fit Their Narrative

In New Mexico, the son of an Islamic Imam was training CHILDREN to become school shooters and KILL children. One would expect the anti-gun fools to be all over that, but they’re not. Why is that? The answer is simple: this situation doesn’t fit their narrative. Yes, guns are involved, but this is obviously Islamic terrorism, which is a little “out of their territory.” If this fool had been successful, and one or more of his “students” had invaded a school and killed a few children, maybe they’d get interested, even though there is NO WAY those children could ever get a gun, legally. There’s another aspect to this story that is a reason the liberal news media barely covers it. The Islamic terrorism angle. The liberal media, for some stupid reason, is bound and determined to “cover up” anything Islamic terrorist, and this fits that narrative. They don’t even make much of the fact that one three-year-old child was KILLED during their “training,” after being KIDNAPPED from his home, by his FATHER, fergawdsakes! Update: A local judge released them all on a technicality.But the feds, to their credit (under Trump) re-arrested them on federal charges. (Gun Free Zone)

Blaming Republicans

Dumocrats are tying now to blame Republican for the “gun violence” in Chicago. Never mind the unalterable fact that Chicago is, and has been, run by Dumocrats for as long as I can remember—and I can remember a long time back. The latest attempt was initiated by Dumocrat Senator Dick Durbin (that first name is very descriptive of his intelligence), who tried to blame the GOP for the gun violence in Chicago. Linking to an ABC News report about an “anti-violence activist” in Chicago who’d been fatally gunned down, Durbin tweeted, “This is heartbreaking. Chicago has lost far too many aspiring young people to senseless gun violence. When will Republicans in Congress finally decide to act?” How he makes that connection is a mystery to intelligent people, since Chicago is RUN by Dumocrats, and has been for a long time. James woods called Durbin “an embarrassment.” And he’s right. But the nimrods in Illinois keep electing him, and people like him. Meanwhile, they are still waiting for things to get better—as Dumocrats promise, but never deliver. (Conservative Tribune)

Gun Control Defies Logic

And all those anti-gun fools who make all those USELESS laws that do NOTHING to stop, or even SLOW DOWN “gun crime” have to know that. It’s not necessarily the laws that make no sense, it is the very idea that you can stop “gun crime” by making laws against it. People who want to kill people will just IGNORE your laws, or just use something else. Like the “box cutters” the Islamic terrorists used to hijack the four airplanes they used to kill 3,000 people in the World Trade Center. “Gun-free zones,” for example. Has there ever BEEN a single mass shooting that happened OUTSIDE of a gun-free zone? Criminals freely tell us they SEEK OUT such zones in which to do their “dirty work,” just BECAUSE they can be pretty sure nobody who OBEYS laws will be armed, and able to stop him from killing people—until the cops finally get there with their guns. “Background checks” don’t work because would-be killers either pass them if they haven’t yet committed a crime, or they just get their guns ILLEGALLY, or use something else in their quest to kill people. “Safe storage laws” only keep the guns people already legally own impossible to get into action quickly enough to repulse a criminal with his ILLEGAL gun, which he already has in his hand. Criminals IGNORE LAWS. That’s a given. So law-abiding people are at a disadvantage in dealing with them, and they can usually kill at will with their ILLEGALLY-owned guns. Laws do nothing to stop that, so why not look for something else to do, to accomplish that goal? The reason is simple: they don’t KNOW anything else, and they want to convince the voters they are DOING SOMETHING, even if it is USELESS. (Just common sense)

Gun-Free Zones Are Dangerous

One of the favorite things for the anti-gun fools is to create new “gun-free zones.” The only problem is, a gun-free zone is a dangerous place to be. ALL mass shootings take place in “gun-free zones.” Potential mass killers SEEK OUT gun-free zones because they figure they can be pretty sure there will be no law-abiding citizens there who are armed, and able to resist them when they bring their guns to kill people. Yes, the cops will soon come with their guns, and shoot him. But not until AFTER he has killed a bunch of unarmed, innocent people. Potential mass shooters not only seek out gun-free zones, they AVOID shooting up places where there MIGHT be guns in the hands of their intended victims.

Anti-gun fools HAVE to know this. It is as obvious as the noses on their faces. But they ignore this FACT, and keep on insisting on creating more and more of them, in spite of these FACTS. From that, I can only figure they’re STUPID. Not ignorant. Ignorant is just not having all the facts. Stupid is KNOWING things, but doing stupid things, anyway. I keep asking them why this is, and you know what they answer? Nothing. They don’t bother. They just start calling me names. Like “gun nut.”Or “Nazi.” Or their all-time favorite, “racist.” They have no facts with which to answer, so they just stick me with one of their labels and go right on with their stupidities. (Breitbart)

Wiser Heads Prevailed

Almost. Remember that guy who got pushed to the ground by a man that he had threatened in the past, because he was hassling a woman who illegally parked in a handicapped zone? The guy who then drew his gun and killed the guy who pushed him down, as he was leaving? The local “authorities” called it a “stand your ground” situation and said they were not going to file charges against him for murder. WRONG! Under “stand your ground,” you MUST be “afraid for your life,” and this guy was NOT. The guy who pushed him down was turning to leave when shot. He was, in NO WAY posing a threat to this guy’s life. Quite he opposite, actually. The guy he pushed down had previously threatened to kill the victim, and carried out that threat, here. He SHOULD have been charged with premeditated murder. They actually charged him with manslaughter, and even THAT could be changed as time goes on. Double jeopardy does not apply until the guy has been tried, and not convicted. Charges are revised in many cases as additional facts are considered. One would hope that happens in this case, or this guy will be getting away with first degree murder. (Legal Insurrection)

Why Do They Lie?

Public health officials often LIE to support the “flights of fancy” politicians call “gun safety laws." Why is that? Because they have no FACTS to support their position, and they need to CREATE some facts. “In 1918, President Woodrow Wilson’s Committee on Public Information was inspired by an advisor who wrote: ‘Truth and falsehood are arbitrary terms. . . . The force of an idea lies in its inspirational value. It matters very little if it is true or false.’ ” Public health officials usually do the bidding of the government, and the government wants to DISARM the populace for their own purposes, whatever they might be. I’m not going to say those purposes are evil, but I will note than when Hitler disarmed Nazi Germany, he later MURDERED six million Jews. When Josef Stalin did it in the Soviet Union, he later murdered more millions. Our own government has already demonstrated a propensity for STEALING the property of its citizens through the RICO laws, which were only passed to violate the constitutional right to counsel of drug dealers, by taking away the money they needed to pay their lawyers. Yes, they were guaranteed lawyers, but not necessarily COMPETENT counsel. ‘they got “fresh out of laws school” kids, LEARNING how to be lawyers, which gave the government the “upper hand” at trial. One big cause of death is government. In the Twentieth Century, 212 people were killed by their own government. That is up to FOUR TIMES the number killed in the Spanish Epidemic. (Truth About Guns)

Ask them to Stop Killing

That’s Rahm Emanuel’s solution to his serious gun crime problem in Chicago. Ask the gangs who are doing most of the shooting to stop murdering each other. That’s even worse than the solution used in one California city, to PAY them to stop killing each other. This is the action of a politician who is out of ideas, and is desperate. He doesn’t have a clue as to what to do, so he’s BEGGING the criminals not to commit these crimes. The real solution is to allow the law-abiding to have, and use guns for self defense. Yes, shootings will increase for a time, as the law-abiding kill most of the people who try to kill them with their ILLEGAL guns. But as those fools die off, the numbers will go back down. Anti-gun fools shudder to think of this solution because they’re ignorant. They think that all you have to do is make a law, and lawBREAKERS will obey it. The criminals just IGNORE their laws, and go right on killing each other (and others who get in the line of fire). Gun violence will continue at unbelievable levels as long as anti-gun fools keep making laws for criminals to ignore, and the law-abiding to obey, thus making the law-abiding “easy targets” for those who IGNORE those silly laws. (The National Sentinel)

Defensive Gun Use?

It’s a lot more prevalent than the anti-gun fools want you to think. They recently put out a “poll” that included mostly liberal-run states and ignored states that are more “gun friendly” to support their lies. This “study” only reported stats from a very small number of states. If all 50 states had been included, the numbers would be very different. Truth is, defensive uses of guns happened 1 million times a year nationally. Which is a figure the anti-gun fools would rather you not know. This is under their oppressive, useless anti-gun laws that do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down ILLEGAL gun use, but only DISARM the law-abiding, who are the targets of those illegal guns, making them defenseless. A million times a year is amazing, since the anti-gun fools tell you confidently it doesn’t happen. And they publish flawed “studies” to prove the lie. The fact is, you just can’t depend on ANY of their figures to be true. Their very basic PREMISE is flawed. It is that, if they can “get rid of guns,” magically, all crime will disappear. That the NRA is somehow a dastardly organization because they stand up for enforcing the LAW, and adhering to the Constitution. They can’t answer their arguments, so they resort to their usual scam, just call them names, like “Nazi,” “terrorist,” etc. (Reason)

The Ninth Strikes Again

A three judge panel on the Ninth Circuit (9^th Circus) Court of Appeals, one of the most liberal courts in the land, has decided that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to California. That states can override the Constitution in its control of the law. Never mind that the Constitution is the very BASIS for ALL LAWS made in the United states. And so far, California is STILL part of the United States, and thus the Constitution still RULES there, no matter what a few liberal judges think they have to say to the contrary. The second DOES apply there, no matter what a few liberal judges may think. Their opinion doesn’t count, because all a lower court can do is affirm or deny the constitutionality of a law that is presented for a ruling. This ruling by them creates a very important concept: whether or not a lower court judge can change the meaning of an Amendment, just by making a ruling. They cannot. Their rulings MUST adhere to the Constitution, and CANNOT change the meaning of an Amendment. This arrogance by a small number of judges cannot be abided, and a higher court MUST reverse them, IMMEDIATELY, before this “ruling” can take effect, and ruin a number of lives. (Liberty Headlines)

Kavanaugh's "Extreme Beliefs"

Liberals call his view that the Second Amendment should be enforced as such “extreme views on guns.” Since when is obeying the constitution “extreme?” They say his views are “right out of the gun lobby’s playbook,” and why shouldn’t they be, since the “gun lobby” is only lobbying for the law to be enforced, and the Constitution to be followed? They say his views will allow domestic violence offenders to have guns, which they will NOT. Domestic violence offenders soon become felons, and then are not allowed guns, UNDER the Constitution. Meanwhile, real “common sense gun laws” would allow his intended VICTIM to be armed, so as to defend herself against him. He’d probably get a gun illegally, anyway, which is very easy for those who don’t care about obeying the law. that’s something the anti-gun fools never consider. In Denver recently, one woman violated the “waiting period” laws and bought a gun illegally. Which was a good thing because she soon had to use that gun to keep from being KILLED by that ex boyfriend. I’m not sure what happened to her after that, but a short stint in prison for having a gun illegally is a lot better than DEAD. Liberals are afraid he’s going to get rid of Roe V. Wade, too. Another short-sighted decision by a liberal dominated Supreme Court years ago that resulted in MILLIONS of deaths of innocent children, still in the womb (and sometimes OUT of the womb). Liberals are afraid of him because they KNOW he will go BY the Constitution and the law, not their cherished liberal scams. (Think)

It's A Democrat Thing

It’s almost a “litmus test.” to be a Dumocrat you MUST be in favor of “gun control,” abortion, and same sex marriage, men in women’s bathrooms, among other stupid things. A FEW Dumocrats don’t fit this bill, but it is VERY few. Arizona Dumocrat Anne Kirkpatrick made a lot of noise about her high NRA rating in 2010, but not this year. She says she “gave away” the guns she inherited from her grandfather and is now “no longer a proud gun owner.” She succumbed to pressure from the Party and now supports such USELESS laws as background checks and bump-stock bans. Other than that, nothing has changed. Dumocrats generally support ALL the useless, unenforceable gun laws. Laws like those supporting “gun-free zones,” which directly get people killed, as would-be mass shooters SEEK THEM OUT in which to do their “dirty work,” because they figure they can be pretty sure there won’t be any law-abiding people there with guns to oppose them. If you can find something STUPID to promote to the electorate, the Dumocrats will “pick it up” and run with it. They’re stupid that way. Not a single one of their highly touted “gun laws” do ANYTHING to cut down or eliminate “gun crime,” and I’ve told them time after time, while they ignore me as if I don’t exist—or they call me names and try to get somebody to shoot me. (The Crime Report)

California Gun Fight

Wait—aren’t guns supposed to be mostly illegal in California? How then, did the guys who got in a gun fight in San Bernardino that wounded ten people, with three of them extremely critical condition, get their guns? The cops say both handguns and rifles were involved (though they didn’t use the infamous words, “AR-15,” or “assault weapon”). The perps are still at large, having escaped long before the cops arrived (an old story) to clean up the scene and get rid of the (this time still alive) bodies. It’s an old story. In places where guns are illegal or VERY hard to get for the law-abiding who OBEY laws, lawBREAKERS ignore the laws and get their guns ILLEGALLY, putting us all in danger of being killed by one of their badly-aimed illegal bullets. And the anti-gun fools will predictably politicize this shooting, even before the blood has dried on the ground, demanding even more USELESS laws that do NOTHING to “stop gun violence,” instead of pursuing real solutions, such as finding out WHY people like this do what they do, so these thing can be predicted and prevented. But that’s an old argument, and one I’m getting tired of repeating over and over for the anti-gun fools to ignore, while they call me names so they don’t have to answer my questions. (Breitbart)