Swalwell's "65-Point-Plan"

Eric Swalwell thinks he’s got it done. All he has to do is get his 65-point plan to control guns and ammunition into effect. His plan contains nothing new, and is a collection of all the tired old laws and regulations that have not worked worth a damn to “stop gun crime.” It’s an effort for this Dumocrat presidential candidate to revive his flagging presidential campaign, and it won’t work any better that all his potential anti-gun laws worked. Since he listens only to liberal Dumocrats, he thinks the world wants gun control, without knowing what gun control will ever stop, or even slow down “gun crime.” I don’t think even he believes his effort will do anything about gun crime, but he hopes it will help his flagging presidential campaign. His plan is so complicated that nobody can really understand it, and that’s okay with him. The less people understand his plan, the less able they are to point out its flaws, and that suits him right down to his toes. Swalwell is the guy, you remember, who told us the government “had nukes” they could use on us, so they could pass laws to control guns. Nuclear force to “get rid of guns,” of course. Somebody needs to tell Swalwell that more violence is not the route to less violence, and that law breakers will never obey his laws, even if he manages to get them passed. And remind him all his ideas are unconstitutional. (Guns)

"Gun Laws Save Lives!"

I just saw an anti-gun fool demonstrator holding a sign that said, “Gun Laws Save Lives.” I had to laugh at the ignorance that caused that demonstrator to hold that sign, plus the ignorance that led an organizer to PRINT that sign. Gun laws DO NOT “save lives!” They get people KILLED! They can’t show me a single instance in which an anti-gun law saved a life. “Gun-Free Zones,” for instance, one of their favorite things, be it a law or just a corporate decision. There has not occurred a single mass shooting that has NOT happened IN a gun-free zone. Gun-free zones are an open invitation for gunmen to come in and shoot some people without fear that the law-abiding people there will be armed, even if they have “carry permits.” Because such zones supersede “carry permits.” So the law-abiding leave their guns at home and get KILLED when a law BREAKER brings his guns there and starts shooting people. Now let’s look at “safe storage laws.” They only serve to keep the law-abiding from getting their guns into operation quickly enough to successfully oppose a holder of an ILLEGAL gun invading their home of office. Again, that law only gets the law-abiding person KILLED. It is only the ignorant who believe that anti-gun laws “save lives.” And way too many of the ignorant have been elected to office where they can make stupid laws. Gun registration only lets the cops find a shooter AFTER he has done his crime—IF he bought his gun legally and stood for one. (Just common sense)

Are They Stupid?

Or what? Many politicians, including Eric Swalwell, think they have the power to BAN guns, and some even believe they can put people who refuse to give them up in jail. Swalwell has put forth some really stupid ideas on gun control. Ideas that involve all the stupid, unenforceable, useless anti-gun laws that have already been passed somewhere, and all of which have failed to stop, or even slow down “gun crime.” But that doesn’t seem to dawn on them. I don’t really think they’re stupid. Ignorant, maybe. Ignorant people merely lack essential knowledge and act in spite of that ignorance. Stupid people HAVE that essential knowledge, yet act as if they did not, taking stupid actions. I firmly believe Swalwell is one of those. He thinks being stupid about gun control will get him elected president, but it will NOT. Nothing will get this fool elected president. I’m surprised he even got elected to the job he has now. Rep. Seth Moulton, Dumocrat, of course, thinks we can actually impose a total gun ban, and that will solve all the problems. It will not. It will simply make life easier for the criminals who IGNORE their laws and victimize the law-abiding, who do. But then, there’s that “sticky” little thing called the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which makes any such ban impossible in this country. (Just common sense)

Excuse for Gun Control

In Virginia Beach, Virginia, a disgruntled city employee went into a municipal building and killed 13 people, including himself. The cops actually shot him, but his actions caused his own death, so you could say he killed himself. Not mentioned (as usual) is whether or not the gun he used was legally held, But that makes no difference. If it was legal, it’s because he had no criminal record when he bought it. If illegal, he got it by breaking the law. But a person planning on murdering a bunch of people is not going to be concerned about violating a silly little anti-gun law. But you can bet the anti-gun fools will use this occurrence as an excuse to demand the making of more of their useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws that have, heretofore, done NOTHING to stop such occurrences. They don’t know what else to do, but they want to be able to say they “did something,” even if it was useless. I really get tired of writing these things over and over, and being ignored. It’s time somebody “got smart” and tried something else that might be a little more successful when blaming the gun doesn’t work. (The Virginian-Pilot)

Avoiding the Issue

Chicago has a major gun violence problem. We all know the causes. One, their very tight anti-gun laws disarm the law-abiding, making life much easier for the law breakers, who ignore their anti-gun laws and victimize people with their ILLEGAL guns. And two, a major gang violence problem. Gang members regularly shoot each other, and anybody who gets in the way of their badly-fired bullets. They aren’t very well trained in proper use of guns, you know. But Chicago just doesn’t want to face reality and allow the law-abiding to be armed for self defense, thus allowing a “level playing field” for the law-abiding, who now are totally DISARMED, making them “easy targets” for those who ignore their laws and carry their illegal guns all the time. They’re going to spend $75 million dollars of taxpayer money to “study the root causes of violence.” The “root causes” of violence in Chicago is as plain as the nose on their faces, but they won’t recognize them, preferring to spend taxpayer money to obscure that fact. There IS no “solution” to the illegal use of guns except to allow the potential victims to shoot back. That would, at least, reduce gun violence, one illegal shooter at a time. (WGN TV)

Justifying Gun Control

Maine Rep. Victoria Morales (A Dumocrat, of course) saw a man enter a school with his hand in his pocket and was terrified. So she wants more useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws made. She really is stupid enough to believe that a LAW will stop that man (if, he indeed is a danger) from getting a gun. And she is able to actually get such stupid laws made, in her ignorance. And we (not me) keep electing such people to places where they CAN get such laws made, even if they do get people killed by making them defenseless against the millions of ILLEGAL guns already out there. What have these people been SMOKING to make them so stupid? Is there something in the air that makes them so stupid? You do NOT defend yourself by disarming yourself. The government knows that, as witness our national defense policies. They’re not going to disarm themselves, so why should we? Yet their stated goal is to “get rid of all guns not in the hands of the government.” That makes me very suspicious, doesn’t it you? (Maine Examiner)

Shouting Me Down

I once attended an anti-gun rally just to see for myself the lies they told about gun control. After they were done telling their lies, they opened things to questions. When it was my turn, the organizers handed me the microphone and I started to ask this question: “Why do you keep passing laws that not only don’t work, but actually make it easier for holders of illegal guns to victimize the law-abiding, who obey your laws, even if they think they’re stupid?” I only got half through that question when the crowd started shouting me down because it was a question to which they had no answer, and they didn’t want me to be able to finish asking it. From that moment on, I felt threatened in that crowd, and couldn’t get to the outside door fast enough. This is evidence that they don’t care a whit that their laws don’t work, but they want to keep making them because that gives them the POWER to tell law-abiding people what they can, and cannot do. Nothing more, nothing less. They don’t care that their laws DISARM the law-abiding, making them DEFENSELESS against the millions of ILLEGAL guns already out there. The only REAL way to at least slow down “gun violence” is to give the law-abiding a “level playing field” by allowing them to have and use their own guns, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the Constitution. (Just common sense)

Blaming Lax Gun Laws

In Trenton, NJ, the mayor is giving the feds hell for not having tight enough gun laws after 11 people were injured in a drive-by shooting. What is not mentioned is that New Jersey already has some of the tightest gun laws going, and that didn’t interfere, in any way, with the shooting. Something else not mentioned is whether or not the guns used were gotten legally, or illegally. That’s never mentioned in these cases, when politicians want to blame “lax gun laws” for shootings done usually using illegally-gotten guns. Then there is the unalterable fact that NONE of the currently existing anti-gun laws, anywhere, have done a single thing to prevent evil-doers from getting their guns. Places that are “gun-free zones” particularly are at fault. EVERY mass shooting so far has occurred IN a “gun-free zone.” “Gun-free zones” are an open invitation to would-be shooters to come in and shoot somebody because the law-abiding there will usually not be armed and able to defend themselves. As long as anti-gun fools blame the guns, this will continue. Politicians can blame somebody else all they want, and it will change nothing. Although it will make that politician feel better, thinking he has done SOMETHING to reduce gun violence. (NJ)

Gun Control Fails Again

In Sacramento, California (the gun control state), a rookie cop was shot and killed—with an unregistered gun. Surprise, surprise! The shooter ignored their demand that the owners of such guns register them. They went in to answer a domestic violence call and ran into an ambush. Found inside the home later was not only one illegal gun, but several. They caught the killer, but whether or not he will be subject to being executed is in question, since California Governor Gavin Newsom has stopped all executions (but not that of the cops these people kill). The shooting lasted 8 hours and included the wounding of a second cop. They finally had to use an armored car to get close enough to capture him. The next question is, “Is he an illegal alien?” If he is, he will probably be released. And I’d bet he doesn’t make it to his car if he is. Remember, this is California, where an illegal alien thug can walk up to an innocent woman in San Francisco, shoot and kill her while her dad watched, and get off scot-free. But that’s only an aside. The point is, this guy had many guns and other items banned by law, yet he still had them. Hopefully, “wiser heads” will prevail, and he will never see the sun without some bars between him and it. (Truth About Guns)

Stupid Anti-Gun Laws

I can give you a list of ALL stupid anti-gun laws, right here, now, that don’t work. Ready? ALL OF THEM. There isn’t a single anti-gun law that does ANYTHING to “combat gun crime.” Why? Because criminals do not obey laws. ANY laws. They disobey laws every day. That’s why they’re called criminals. In addition, every anti-gun law in existence, and those to be made in the future, DEPEND ON a law-breaker to OBEY a law—which he doesn’t. And if the law-abiding person obeys them, he/she puts him/herself in deadly danger because, when faced with a criminal holding an ILLEGAL GUN, he/she is DEFENSELESS. Many anti-gun laws only make the law-abiding person unable to get his/her gun into operation quickly enough to successfully oppose the holder of an illegal gun—who has his gun in his hand, loaded, cocked, and ready to go. While the law-abiding person has to go to is gun safe, fumble the combination to get it open (with his shaking fingers, shaking from fear of that illegal gun pointed at him/her), remove the trigger lock, and make sure the ammunition is the right kind, that “approved” by a politician who thinks he knows better than we do, what’s good for us, and load the gun. Gun-free zones are the worst kind of anti-gun laws, because they pretty much guarantee the holder of an illegal gun that if he enters with his illegal gun to do something illegal, like killing a few innocent people, those there will not be armed, because they OBEY the law, even if it is stupid. So anti-gun laws KILL those law-abiding people who obey them, leaving the field open to those who do NOT. (Just common sense)

Anti-Gun Fables

“You should be willing to give up your constitutional right to be armed for self defense because the government can protect you.” ...NOT! This is a common lie told by the anti-gun fools, even though it cannot be proven to be true, and indeed has been proven, over and over again, to be false. They still tell this lie after it has been disproved many times over. They make law after law to limit the purchase and use of guns by law-abiding people, and they obey them. And get killed by those who just ignore those laws and get their guns illegally. And there isn’t much any of their laws can do about “gun crime,” because they only seem to apply to the law-abiding. They just don’t seem to understand this simple truth: criminals don’t obey laws, so no amount of law making will work. Worse yet, they also fail to understand that limiting the purchase and handling of guns for the law-abiding gets those law-abiding people killed. They have to be aware of this, so they must have an ulterior motive in passing all these laws. They do. It is POWER. The power to tell you you can or can’t do a thing. “Gun crime” is just an excuse. (Just common sense)

How Stupid Are They?

The very definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. The anti-gun fools have to know their highly vaunted “common sense gun laws” don’t do a thing to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” yet they keep on making more and more of them. They not only do not stop anything, they make life much more dangerous for the law-abiding, who OBEY their silly laws, even though they know they’re stupid laws. The difference between ignorance and stupidity is simple: ignorance is a lack of knowledge, while stupidity is HAVING knowledge, but doing the same things over and over again. One of their worst laws is the “gun-free zone.” It creates a “gilt-edged invitation” for the holders of ILLEGAL guns to come in and shoot somebody because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding will not be armed, there. There is no telling how many innocent people have been injured and KILLED in “gun-free zones” by people who obey NO laws. Each and EVERY mass shooting has occurred IN a “gun-free one,” yet they keep making them. I can’t abide such stupidity. (Just common sense)

Gabby Wants Background Checks

She wants the old, tired “solution” to “gun violence” that has never worked before to stop a single case of gun violence.” She actually believes that background checks will stop all “gun crime.” She’s a fool and is blinded by the fact that she took a bullet in the head and survived. Ever since she’s tried to get rid of all the guns she can, never mind the only ones she could ever have any effect upon are those owned by law-abiding people. Criminals would still get their guns the same way they’ve always gotten them. Buy them illegally, get them “under the table” from their friends, of just steal them. Background checks will never stop that. Not in a million years. Many mass shooters got their guns the same way if they were prohibited legally from owning a gun. But too many of them were NOT felons before they decided to kill a bunch of people, and their names and addresses would not appear on a list help by those conducting background checks. How she figures putting their names on a background list will PREVENT such shootings, I don’t know. But in her twisted way of thinking since being shot in the head, she believes it would. (Huffington Post)

"Only the Feds"

It amuses me what anti-gun fools will do and say to advance their drive to disarm all Americans (except for those working for the government in one way or another, of course). Now Mark Cuban says that, “Only the feds can’t stop you from owning guns. The states can do anything they want to you.” What a damned fool statement that is! The states CANNOT make laws that do not abide by the Constitution of the United States. That was part of the contract they signed when attaining statehood. They CANNOT “do anything they want to you.” They MUST abide by the Constitution. Dumocrat hack Joe Biden says the Second Amendment doesn’t guarantee your right to own “assault weapons.” But it DOES, Joe! It does NOT name ANY kind of a gun. It simply guarantees our right to “keep and bear ARMS.” An “assault weapon” IS an ARM! So it DOES “guarantee our right to own an “assault weapon” (whatever that is). Every day some anti-gun fool comes up with some bogus crap that will allow them to deny us the constitutional RIGHT to self defense, and to own and use the means to that, a gun. But it doesn’t work, and will NEVER work, because Americans are DETERMINED to keep that sacrosanct right, no matter what the anti-gun fools say. The “average American” does NOT want gun control. (Just common sense)

Reducing Gun Violence

One shooter at a time. In Kansas, a would-be robber jumped the counter at “Boost Mobil” store and was immediately shot dead by one of the employees. This guy won’t be robbing any more stores, and that’s for sure. As one commenter said, “In Maryland, that store clerk would be prosecuted for not running away and giving that robber the whole store.”Another commenter brought out that funeral homes and casket makers are doing a land office business where anti-gun laws are the tightest, and they’re right. Where there are tight anti-gun laws, like in Chicago and LA, the “gun crime” statistics are also very high. Which should send a message to the anti-gun fools, but it won’t. Which is why I call them fools. They have to be aware that their laws do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” but they keep insisting on making even more of them, while the law-abiding DIE at the hands of the criminals, who ignore their anti-gun laws and are defenseless. Which shows me that they are NOT trying to reduce gun crime at all. They just want to be able to tell people what they can, and cannot do. (Breitbart)

Clooney Is Wrong

And he’s finding out just how wrong he is to support the stupid, unrealistic, unenforceable anti-gun laws that do nothing except disarm the law-abiding, leaving them defenseless in the face of the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there in the hands of criminals and Islamic terrorists. He has spoken out widely against guns and, apparently, the right to self defense. He has “contributed” a lot of money to anti-gun fool causes, and has promised to contribute another $500,000.00 to the “cause.” But his wife, who is a lawyer, has pushed cases against Islamic terrorists and their stupid deeds, and ISIS has “taken an interest” in them. For a human being, that would mean at least getting a gun for himself, or hiring armed security to accompany him everywhere he and his wife go, but that would be hypocritical. To be true to his foolishness, he should continue to go unarmed, and thus place his entire family in deadly danger. It’s a decision I would sorely hate to have to make. Maybe this will make him come to his senses and stop supporting that silly attempt to destroy the entire concept of self defense. (Western Journal)

They Never Learn

After a former employee came into the municipal building in Virginia Beach, VA, they want now to pass a special law banning guns in municipal buildings. They lament the fact that the city council can prevent city employees from bring guns into the buildings, and they want a law made to prevent the public from bringing them in, too. This assumes that a gunman wishing to kill a few people there will actually OBEY such a law This reflects the ignorance of lawmakers who think making a LAW against something will actually stop people from doing it. But a person who wants to commit a very serious crime such as murder or mass murder is not going to be concerned with obeying their silly anti-gun laws. They wish to pass this law in the face of the unalterable fact that if an employee, or even a citizen had been armed when that disgruntled former employee had come in and started shooting, they could have ENDED his shooting spree before he could have killed so many people. (The Virginian-Pilot)

Gun-Grabber Twists

Newspaper editors commonly write their headlines to fool those who usually read nothing BUT the headlines—which are far too many. This particular story’s headline indicates just the opposite of the real story. The headline reads, “Man Shot by Concealed Carrier Dies.” Now that would make most intelligent people think that “concealed carrier” shot that man, just for the fun of it. Buried deep in the article in the Chicago Tribune is the admission that the dead man was shot by that concealed carrier after he pulled his own gun and tried to kill him. So that “concealed carrier” shot him, and paralyzed him. Emphasized in the story was the fact that the man was paralyzed when he died, thus making him an object of pity. Again, not mentioned is the fact that he was only paralyzed after he pulled a gun on the “concealed carrier” and he later died from his wounds. This is how the anti-gun fools twist the news to suit themselves. Never believe their twisted stories. (Truth About Guns)

Idiotic Anti-Gun Quotes

Former VP “Ol’ Joe” Biden told us all you have to do is “fire a shotgun through the door” to run off a potential shooter. Of course, if anybody did that, he’d probably end up in jail, or kill the pizza delivery guy or even a spouse. Or both. Biden has said many stupid things, but this is one of the worst. New York Dumocrat Louise Slaughter thinks the Second Amendment only covers people who what all the guns they can have, and covers nobody else. Never mind the Constitution applies to everybody. She blames the Second Amendment for “gun crime,” completely ignoring the fact that MOST of the gun crime is done by those who use ILLEGAL guns. Colorado Rep Diana DeGette thinks magazines are bullets and are not replaceable. Therefore after they’ve all been shot there won’t be any more. This illustrates (again) how gun ignorant most legislators who make anti-gun laws are. Washington State Senator Jeannie Darnielle (Dumocrat, of course), a noted “gun enemy,” says, “Guns shock and sicken me.” And she’s one of those who pretend to have the right to make laws against law-abiding people having and using guns, in spite of the act that the Constitution guarantees that right. There are many more stupid anti-gun comments in the linked article, but I just have no room to relate them all. You’ll just have to read the article. (Wide Open Spaces)

Unconstitutional Requirement

In Illinois, you have to buy a “permission card in order to buy a gun. That is an unconstitutional requirement, because it is an “abridgment” upon a constitutional right. It is supported by a law that is unconstitutional, and will ultimately be ruled so by the supreme court, if they ever rule on it. But, like most unconstitutional laws, it will be enforced until then. Millions of dollars will be collected by the state, and the rights of its citizens will be ignored. If someone is caught with a gun without that insignificant little card, he will be fined, or even imprisoned. The damage will have been done. What is not being said, except for people like me, is that the Constitution clearly says, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.” The PEOPLE, not a “militia.” An organized militia did not even exist at the time of the writing of this amendment, and EVERY CITIZEN was considered to be a member of such a militia if it were ever organized, for the defense of the nation. The government, which was not as “awash in money” as it is now, wanted people to bring their own guns if “called up,” and that could not happen if access to guns was restricted. Additionally, the right to self defense was sacrosanct, and not subject to cancellation. Now a Dumocrat politician wants to raise the cost of that stupid “permission card” by 400%! If that is not an “abridgment,” I don’t know what is. (Breitbart)

Complete Ignorance

In the UK, police are handing out blunt knives, hoping that will reduce “knife crime.” That’s about as ignorant an act as making a LAW for criminals to ignore, against the guns they have no trouble getting illegally. They’re CRIMINALS, after all. They do not obey laws. Disobeying laws is how they make their living. So they’re expected to obey anti-gun laws? Sheesh! UK officials handing out blunt knives is stupid because criminals have no more trouble getting sharp knives than they do guns. Less, in fact. It takes a special kind of ignorance to hand out blunt knives and expect criminals to “agree” to use only them in their criminal acts. Other anti-gun laws are just as ignorant. “Gun-free zones,” for instance. Criminals love them because they can be pretty sure the law abiding people there will not be armed, and will thus be defenseless against them when they bring in their ILLEGAL guns with which to victimize them. Each and every mass shooting that has occurred has happened IN a “gun-free zone.” That should tell them something, but it does not. They keep making more of them, while the law-abiding continue to die in them. (Gun-Free Zone)

WHAT Change?

People gathered the other day as the site of Colorado’s latest school shooting to DEMAND change. One guy said, “We’re tired of sending our kids to school wondering if they’ll come home alive.” There was one ten year-old KID who made a speech in favor of gun control, being completely ignorant of the fact that gun control does nothing except make the law-abiding defenseless against people who get their guns illegally, as most mass shooters do. Or they get them legally if they have committed no crimes or have not been “said” to be “unstable” by a brother-in-law and “liable to shoot everybody around.” So I have to ask, “WHAT change?” People who demand change need to make suggestions, but they don’t know any more than we do on what changes to make. People are always demanding we “do something about guns,” when it isn’t the gun, it’s the PEOPLE. There is NO GUN LAW that can do a single thing about controlling the misuse of guns. None of those people at this gathering seemed to be aware of that. So what the hell CAN we do to protect our children when they go to school? Let the teachers and other non-uniformed school personnel bring their already legally-carried guns to school with them, so if a shooter comes to shoot the place up, he can be “dealt with” even before the cops can get there. But the anti-gun fools, to their everlasting shame, wont even HEAR of that. (Buzz Feed News)

Killing Students Allowed Here"

That’s what the sign shown posted at a school really is saying. It actually says, “Carrying Firearms Is Prohibited On This Property.” That tells potential mass killers there will most likely be no law-abiding people on the property who are armed, so it is safe for him to come in and kill a few students, and maybe a few teachers and other staff. Anti-gun fools really think posting such signs will stop a potential mass killer from coming onto the property with a loaded gun. Or they pretend they think so, anyway. But “gun control” is not about controlling guns. It is about controlling PEOPLE.

It’s about the POWER to tell people what they can, and cannot do. They don’t want to keep guns out of the hands of the law breakers. They want to keep them out of the hands of the VICTIMS. They want fewer guns in the hands of their own intended victims when they come to “legally” take what is yours. Don’t believe that? Take a look at what they now do under the current RICO Laws. They put little strips into all your paper dollars that they can scan as you walk by so they’ll know if you are carrying enough cash to make you worthwhile to rob.

Each bill will report its denomination and presence so they can count your money before stopping you. Then they stop you and take your money, saying it “might” have been gotten illegally. NO proof required, only the OPINION of the thief that you “might” have gotten it illegally. You CAN sue to get some of it back, IF you can afford the lawyers after they’ve taken all your money. You CAN get some of it back if you agree to let them keep most of it. They originally passed those laws to deprive rich drug dealers of the money they needed to “have their day in court.” That’s what they claim, anyway. But the net effect is the enrichment of the “cop shops” and the individual cops, who can apply for, and receive a percentage of “the take.”

I remember one ranch owner who refused to sell his ranch to the local sheriff for a new sheriff’s office. So the sheriff sent in many armed men to raid him on false drug charges. When he was awakened by the noise and came down with a gun in his hand to defend against what he thought (rightfully) was a “home invasion,” they killed him. Later, they “bought” the ranch at a very nice price (for them) from his widow. Now they have a very nice new office property. (Guns)

"Lock UpYour Guns!"

That is what the LA times thinks you should do to defend yourself (against yourself and others), since just owning a gun will make you “go crazy” and shoot someone, you see. They just can’t see the fact that the only way to self defense is to ARM yourself, so you will “have parity” with the criminals, who don’t care about their silly, unenforceable anti-gun laws that only get the law-abiding people, who DO obey their stupid laws, killed or injured. They really believe that the lawless will obey THEIR laws, when they obey no others. Is it something in the water that makes these people so stupid? And the worst part of it is they are able to make laws that make more intelligent people suffer for their stupidity. I really feel sorry for people who believe that all you have to do is make a LAW against something, and people who break laws every day will, somehow, obey them. I love debating these people because they’re so ignorant. They can never answer my points, so they immediately start calling me names, thinking that allows them to win. It doesn’t, but they don’t realize that, either. That’s all part of stupidity. (Breitbart)

Anti-Gun Imbeciles

That’s all I can think about the anti-gun fools. They MUST know that none of their highly-touted anti-gun laws don’t work worth a damn to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” but they insist on making more and more of them. Whenever some fool takes a gun, legally owned, or otherwise, and shoots a few people, they immediately blame the gun, not the shooter. All their laws do is make the law-abiding defenseless against such people because they do not have their own guns to use in self defense. Meanwhile, the bad guys, who don’t bother to obey ANY laws, much less anti-gun laws, never have any trouble obtaining the guns they use to victimize the law-abiding. When we rightly refuse to make any more of those useless laws, they accuse us of all kinds of horrible things, such as WISHING to let criminals buy guns and kill people, when that label could actually be applied to them. They insult the NRA for trying to defend our constitutional RIGHT to “keep and bear arms,” while they try their best to violate it. I just don’t understand what drives these fools, but I will continue to fight them as long as they insist on making these stupid laws. (Just common sense)

Anti-Gun Fanatics!

The headline reads: “Explosion At Gun Store! Four Dead!” Immediately the “antis” scream for explosives to be banned! Meanwhile laughing up their sleeves.”There oughta be a law against explosives!” Wait...there already IS a law against explosives, except in very well controlled situations, for good reason. I guess that law isn’t any more effective than all their anti-gun laws, which only make it easier for the bad guys to victimize the law-abiding, because they are the only people who OBEY those laws, even if they think they’re stupid laws. Of course, this is only a spoof to show how silly and ineffective the anti-gun laws are, while the anti-gun fools continue to insist on making even more of them, while criticizing those of us with a little more intelligence who oppose them because we realize they don’t work, and are even counterproductive, causing death and injury to the law-abiding who do obey them. They really believe that law-breakers, who break laws for a living, will somehow obey their laws, while they obey no others. We’ve been explaining to them how foolish they are to insist on making even more of these silly, ineffective laws that only get people killed and injured, but they aren’t listening. Their minds are made up, so don’t confuse them with facts. (Just common sense)

Taking It Away

“Creepy Joe” Biden seems to think changing the Constitution is as easy as a politician making a decision and implementing it. It is not. To change the Constitution requires a 2/3 vote of the electorate, plus a 2/3 approval by the states. It cannot be done by a simple politician’s decision and action. Biden thinks he can change the Constitution, removing the First Amendment, at will, which shows further his total ignorance of how things work in government. I guess four years in the most useless job in DC fogged his thinking. Actually, that’s wrong. He said that in 1974. One can only hope he has learned better in the years since. By that way of thinking, even the Second Amendment would be in danger. But it’s not. It would take more political capital than he has to even get such a thing started—and the populace would stand up and be heard in ways they have never been heard before if he tried it. That’s one of the things that makes the Constitution a bulwark against would-be dictators (many of which are in the Dumocrat Party). (Viral Buzz)

Armed Teachers "A Bad Idea"

That’s what the anti-gun fools think, anyway. Apparently they think murdered students AND teachers is NOT a “dumb idea.” What kind of logic (if any) leads to this kind of thinking is beyond me. But then, liberals (anti-gun fools are all liberals) think there is no such thing as logic, anyway. I guess they figure if there is no logic, they won’t have to use it in making their stupid decisions. Dumocrat presidential candidate (among many others) Kirsten Gillibrand says armed teachers are “dumb idea,” and are a result of the “NRA greed.” She says that, “all the NRA cares about is gun sales.” I guess she doesn’t think the NRA cares about our constitutional right to be armed, and it’s all about the money, which is what all liberals think. They always belittle their opposition by saying that all they care about is the money. How greed enters into the self-defense question is, again, a mystery to me. I thought it was all about either staying alive or being dead.

But then Gillibrand is not a teacher, so she doesn’t have to worry about staying alive, herself. I guess that’s why she has armed security surrounding her everywhere she goes. She doesn’t? All the other anti-gun fools in Congress do. Maybe she’d feel differently if her sister were a teacher. Gillibrand said, “I think it’s a dumb idea and I think it is something being pitched by the NRA because all they care about is gun sales. They are absolutely corrupted. They are focused on greed and they want to sell guns to people on the terror watch list, to people with grave mental illness, with violent backgrounds or people with criminal convictions for violent crimes, which is why they’re against the universal background check bill that people support across this country, and it’s also why they oppose the Violence Against Women’s Act," all of which is a bunch of bullsh-t. But then, she’s “full of it,” anyway. (Washington Examiner)

Gun-Free Zones Kill

One of the anti-gun fools’ favorite things is the “gun-free zone.” Apparently they just haven’t the intelligence to understand that ALL mass shootings occur IN “gun-free zones.” Not only that, the gun-free zone is a favorite place for robbers and killers to “ply their trade.” I’ve come to the conclusion that they couldn’t care less if their laws get people killed. What they want to do is destroy the very concept of self defense, altogether. And anti-gun laws are the path to that end. Further evidence is that the cops routinely take away any guns that are used in self defense, and want to define ANYTHING that can be used for self defense as a weapon, so they can take that away. I remember standing in the cashier line at a convenience store and the cop behind me piped up and told me that the heavy metal flashlight in my back pocket could be considered a weapon. I replied, “Yes; and if I ever use it as a weapon, we can discuss it then.” Politicians know that, at some time in the future, they’re going to want to come and take what is ours, and they want to meet as few guns in the hands of the property owners as possible. They’ve already started that drive with their RICO laws that allow them to TAKE money and property because it “might” have been obtained illegally. They don’t have to prove anything. Just the idea that it MIGHT have been gotten illegally is enough. (Just common sense)