Why Is This Necessary?

President Trump has (finally) declared that, on a national basis, gun makers, gun retailers, and gun ranges are “essential businesses, nationwide.” this puts the quietus to all the stupid politicians’ efforts to further disarm us, using the Coronavirus as an excuse. Our Constitution PROHIBITS any infringement on our right to “bear arms” for self defense. That means politicians cannot make it difficult to buy a gun, or designate “gun-free zones” where we may not bring what guns we have, nor require them to be stored in such a way as to make it impossible to get them in use when attacked, and mostly, they may not demand we stand for background checks before we can purchase one, give them assurance of a real threat to us, wait until the politicians think we will have “cooled off” enough we won’t go out and shoot somebody. So why did we need the president to make a declaration that guns are an “essential business” to oppose all such attempts, just because of the virus? There are millions of ILLEGAL guns out there in the hands of the lawless, who want to victimize us, and we have to have the means to effectively oppose them. Without that ability, people die and crime increases BECAUSE of all their laws and regulations. (The Gun Feed)

Banning Guns On Campus

A Colorado initiative would ban guns on all university campuses. What? I thought they had illegal laws that already did that. And, of course, all criminals and crazies are rushing to obey them…not. Supporters of this initiative say, “All schools should be safe places to live and work.” Why then, do you make rules that make that impossible? It has been amply proven that “no gun zones” don’t work because criminals and crazies don’t care about breaking laws. So all they do is act as an INVITATION to shooters to “come in and shoot us.” “No gun zones” have claimed more lives than anything else by denying honest citizens the right their Constitution is supposed to guarantee, the right to be armed in self defense. When will politicians realize this? When hell freezes over, I guess. (Daily Caller)

No Common Sense

Anti-gun fools love to describe their useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws as “common sense gun laws.” But in fact, there is nothing “common sense” about them. This phrase “common sense”, as used in the gun debate, contradicts the plain meaning of the term, so it obscures any honest search for truth. A definition of the phrase is: “sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts”. What is common sense about disarming potential victims of the lawless with their Illegal guns, allowing them to victimize the law-abiding at will? What is common sense about making their victims defenseless? Whenever a gun is used in self defense, the cops move to take it away. Sometimes for a short time as “evidence,” and other times permanently. They don’t want us to, in any way, be able to defend ourselves. One time a cop even accosted me because I had a metal flashlight in my back pocket, saying I could use it as a weapon. I responded that, if I ever did, we could discuss it then. But that revealed the thinking of many cops, especially police politicians. They have no right to deny us the use of guns, or any other weapons, for self defense, as the Constitution, to which all laws must conform, prohibits it. People who promote gun control have no common sense. (Truth About Guns)

Why Won't They Learn?

Dumocrats seem to be institutionally determined to do away with the very concept of self defense for law-abiding people. They know their laws do NOTHING to stop the lawless from getting their guns to use in victimizing the law-abiding, so they just concentrate on keeping guns out of the hands of the law-abiding, and to hell with the lawless. It’s like they WANT the law-abiding to be “easy targets” for the lawless, as they go about breaking many laws—including the stupid, unenforceable laws that say they cannot use a gun when they come to victimize the law-abiding. The law-abiding OBEY their laws. That’s why we call them the “law-abiding.” And are totally defenseless against the ILLEGAL guns in the hands of the lawless, whether they be simple criminals, mass murderers, Islamic terrorists, or government agents.. So “gun control” is NOT about gun control, it’s about CONTROL. Period. Ultimately total control over everybody by the government, who will someday, if they have their way, be the only people who have guns and will then become the predators who victimize us. (National Review)

Are They Stupid, Or What?

The anti-gun fools tell you they are making you safer but are making it harder and harder to buy a gun, OR to get it into action fast enough to defend yourself if a criminal or other law-breaker comes to victimize you. In reality, every one of their laws makes it EASIER for the lawless to victimize the law-abiding. Gun-free zones are searched out by the lawless in which to do their dirty work. Every mass shooting has HAPPENED in a gun-free zone. Safe storage laws are PLANNED to make it take you longer to get your gun going when threatened. Waiting periods may be designed to make YOU think about it before getting a gun, but it just means the person threatening you that made you want to buy a gun—right now—has that waiting period for you in which to kill you. Limitations on allowing ammunition purchases are designed to make the guns you HAVE useless. If you don’t have bullets, guns are useless pieces of metal. Maybe you can throw your gun at them. I fail to understand why so damned many politicians are so stupid about guns. I remember Sen. Diane Feinstein trying to make a point in a group by waving around an automatic weapon with her finger ON the trigger. Yes, the gun is supposed to be unloaded. But is it? The people surrounding her were all cringing as the barrel of that weapon passed over them. I could go on and on, but I won’t. Point made. (Just common sense)

Gun Control Hypocrisy

Well-known anti-gun fool “Li’l Mike” Bloomberg was confronted at one of his rallies for his failed presidential run on having armed security while working hard and spending million of dollars to take away our right to be armed for personal security. His answer was a gem: “I’m wealthy. I get death threats. I can afford it. I guess that means he thinks if you’re wealthy and can afford it, you have MORE RIGHTS than us “common folk.” And he’s not the only one who works hard to deny us “common folk” our constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT to “bear arms.” Senator Diane Feinstien is also a well known anti-gun fool and she doesn’t go out without being surrounded by armed thugs—additionally, she had been known to carry her own gun, just in case they are not enough. Just about ALL lawmakers who want to deny us “common folk” the right to “bear arms” go about surrounded by armed men. One known anti-gun columnist (now deceased) caught a teen trespassing on his property, using his swimming pool, and took a shot at him with HIS gun. That pretty well discredited him as an anti-gun fool. Not only do none of the known anti-gun laws do ANYTHING to “stem gun violence,” they actually INCREASE IT by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for the lawless, who IGNORE such laws, along with all the others they ignore in their lives of crime. (Just common sense)

Yes, Guns ARE "Essential"

In the face of the Coronavirus panic, many state governors are putting out lists of “essential” businesses that do not have to follow their “close orders.” In many states, gun stores and other businesses having to do with guns are NOT on those lists. Meanwhile, more and more Americans, realizing that one of the first things to happen in a panic is criminals with their ILLEGAL guns running around victimizing people, they need “parity” to be able to defend themselves. At the same time, anti-gun fools in government jump right up to deny them that “parity,” while the lawless gaily “run roughshod” over them. These fools think holders of LEGAL weapons are the problem when it is the holders of ILLEGAL weapons that ARE the problem. And nobody can convince them otherwise. Their minds are made up, so don’t confuse them with facts. We need to get rid of this kind of politician. People DIE because of their stupidity. Guns in the hands of responsible, honest people ARE “essential” in a time of crisis such as this one. To deny them only to the law-abiding is to condemn many of them to DEATH. (Just common sense)

Declaring Themselves Stupid

That’s the only description I can think of for anti-gun fools who think by making a law they can stop all “gun crime.” That law-breakers will magically OBEY their stupid laws. That holders of illegal guns will “turn them in” at one of their silly, time and money wasting “gun buyback” events where the lawless turn in useless old guns to get money to illegally buy a newer, better gun to use in victimizing the law-abiding, who DO obey their stupid laws, even if they KNOW they’re stupid. You tell them and tell them their laws are useless and do not work, but they stupidly insist on making even more of them, while all they actually accomplish is making it easier to victimize the law-abiding by disarming them. Criminals are NOT going to obey “anti-gun laws.” They’re CRIMINALS. Anybody who thinks they will is stupid, and promoting the making of anti-gun laws just announces their stupidity. The difference between ignorance and stupidity is simple: ignorance is just lack of information. Stupidity is having enough information to make a good decision, but insisting on making a bad one, instead. That’s what anti-gun fools do, which is why I call them stupid. (Just common sense)

Gun Control Helps Criminals

Have you ever noticed that none of their highly-touted anti-gun laws ever apply to the criminals who use them to victimize those who DO obey laws, even if they think they’re stupid? And while we’re at it, have you ever noticed that the cops always take away any weapon (including guns) that is used in self defense, even if that weapon is legally owned and carried? This tells me something simple: they don’t care about the guns. They just want to destroy the very concept of self defense. I once was accosted by a cop who told me the metal flashlight in my back pocket could be considered a weapon. To which I replied, “Yes, and if I ever use it that way, we can discuss it.”

But his very admonishment told me a lot more about their thinking than he knew. They look upon things like that flashlight FIRST as a weapon, and last as an essential tool to people in some professions. Of course, they all carry them, both for illumination AND as a weapon to use in subduing an obstreperous suspect. Some of them they carry are almost three feet long. But if we carry one, they look upon it as something criminal—at least, in theory. The point is, they are against anything that gives us an even chance against those carrying illegal weapons while looking the other way about the millions of illegal guns in the hands of the lawless. (Just common sense)

What SHOULD We Do?

Anti-gun fools are constantly “raking us over the coals” for “not doing anything about gun control.” Which leads to the question: “What would they have us DO? There isn’t a single anti-gun law on the books that has done ANYTHING to “stem gun crime.” And there isn’t a law yet to be made that will do so. You ask them what we should do and they draw a blank. They don’t know any more than we do what we can do to control the misuse of guns for nefarious purposes, so they hem and haw and call us names. We offer the ONLY known way to reduce gun crime, allowing law-abiding Americans to “bear arms” for self defense, as the Constitution guarantees us the right to do, and they are horrified. Horrified at the thought of so many people going around with loaded guns in their pockets, completely ignoring the unalterable fact that there are millions of law-breakers doing just that, right now, and those people use their guns to victimize the law-abiding and other law-breakers, alike. So if any anti-gun fool can come up with anything that will WORK, I’d be happy to hear about it, and help them work to get it enacted. But I will NOT help to get more of their unenforceable, USELESS laws passed, that just make “easy targets of the law-abiding. (Just common sense)

"Guns Are Non-Essential"

In many states where “non-essential business” are being ordered closed. Gun stores are often on the list of stores to be closed. This in spite of the fact that during something as frightening as this virus, “bad guys” often come out of the woods more often with their ILLEGAL guns to victimize people and the law-abiding will need to have their own guns more than ever to effectively oppose them, To deny them that right—and that right is guaranteed by the Constitution—could be to sentence them to death. Meanwhile, in the most liberal states in the union, stupid politicians are denying them that right, and maybe sentencing them to death. Politicians always assume that legal guns are the problem and routinely take them away by refusing them to be allowed to be purchased, especially in disaster situations like this virus, hurricanes such as the one that decimated New Orleans a few years ago, and some tornadoes and floods. They really think disallowing the purchase of LEGAL guns will stop the holders of ILLEGAL guns from being able to victimize people. Nothing could be further from the truth, but they have their blinders fully on, and go ahead with suppressing legal gun ownership, allowing the lawless to “run roughshod” over their victims. New Jersey is at the forefront of this ignorance. (NJ. com)

Give Them 48 Hours

Lots of people try to get guns because somebody threatened them. So the national 48-hour waiting period Bloomberg wants to impose only gives the threatener 48 hours in which to kill them before they can obtain the means to self defense. Unless they get a gun illegally. No waiting periods, there. It is an “infringement” upon our constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT to “bear arms” for self defense. Waiting periods only get people killed, as do all the other stupid, silly, anti-gun laws. And they are ALL unconstitutional because they are all “infringements” upon that right. People like Bloomberg think they know what’s best for all of us because he has more money than he can spend in three lifetimes. Money doesn’t buy intelligence. But then, he isn’t intelligent enough to know that. You tell the anti-gun fools their laws are not only NOT effective to stop, or even slow down “gun violence” and they laugh at you. They think YOU’RE stupid—which is usually a problem with people of little intelligence. They think they’re the “smartest knife in the drawer,” but stupid people are too stupid to know how stupid they are. (Breitbart)

Making Gun Crime Easy

They SAY their anti-gun laws are being made to “protect us.” But they actually do just the opposite. They DISARM the law-abiding, making it easier for the lawless to victimize them. Meanwhile, the lawless get their guns easily, illegally, by either buying them from other criminals or stealing them. Every anti-gun law makes it harder to get a gun into action fast enough to deal with a criminal, or just takes it away, altogether. The lawless love anti-gun laws because they make it so easy for them to victimize disarmed people. In Los Angeles, California, that bastion of tight anti-gun laws, the sheriff is working to empty jails while disparaging gun rights. The sheriff has released over 600 inmates, including those with less than 30 days left to serve on their sentences. Meanwhile, the daily number of arrests across Los Angeles County has in the same period dropped some 80%.

They say it’s over Coronavirus concerns, although so far there has been NO cases identified (as this is written) in Los Angeles County jails. Practically speaking, there is no way for a resident of Los Angeles County to exercise the right to bear arms for self-defense other than with a concealed carry license, and those are just not being issued, as a matter of policy, and in violation of the Constitution. In gun-controlled Chicago, shootings continue apace, in spite of their very tight anti-gun laws. What’s WRONG with these politicians? Are they too stupid to see the results of their stupid actions? Everything they do PROMOTES gun crime! (NRA-ILA)

An Illegal Suit

It’s illegal to sue gun makers for the misuse of their guns. But Kansas City and “Everytown Against Guns (or something like that)” sued one, and won, forcing it into bankruptcy. They had no real proof of any wrongdoing, but they sued them, anyway. And a liberal judge, who apparently doesn’t give a Damn about the law, allowed the suit to go forward to allow a win. Kansas City blames that gun maker for the high crime in this liberal-run city, rather than blame their own silly anti-gun laws that don’t do anything to “fight gun control.” It’s easy to blame something other than your own mistakes for bad things, especially if you can count on a corrupt judge to go along with it. Suing gun makers for the “sins” of their customers is akin to suing auto makers for the sins of their customers—something they have no control over. I just hope I haven’t given car-haters an idea. Again I will say, these people don’t give a damn about “gun crime.” They know their laws do nothing to stop, or even slow it down. What it DOES do is destroy the very concept of self defense—and I believe that’s what they’re after, for whatever nefarious reason. (Bearing Arms)

The People Know

Why is it that, whenever there is a panic like what we’re experiencing now with this Coronavirus scare, people go out and buy guns? It’s not that they want to go out and use those guns to victimize others. Law-abiding people don’t do that. It is the lawless who do. And they don’t bother to buy their guns legally and stand for background checks. The problem with ALL anti-gun laws is that they only apply to the law-abiding, and the law-abiding are NOT the problem. When there is a crisis, people know that the lawless are constantly looking for ways to victimize people, often using their illegally-obtained guns to do so, and want to “have parity” with them. Nothing will stop a gun-wielding criminal quicker than a legal gun-wielding citizen. But politicians try their best to make that impossible. When a private citizen stopped a mass shooting in a Texas church by killing the shooter, anti-gun fools moved in quickly and attempted to eliminate that possibility in the future by banning guns in churches. They SAY it’s to “ensure safety,” but it is not. It is to ensure that the next killer to enter a church with an ILLEGAL gun can kill, at will. I guarantee you that if the anti-gun fools prevail, the honest people will get their own guns illegally, too. And they’re right to do so. (Daily Mail)

Registry Doesn't Save Lives

It only makes it easier to find a shooter IF—and ONLY IF—that gun was bought legally, which is usually not the case when it comes to guns obtained for nefarious purposes. It is only an AFTER the killing that it can do anything, at all. Of course, other anti-gun laws similarly do nothing to stop, or even slow down “gun crime,” but serve to INCREASE it, by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for the lawless, who mostly get their guns “under the table.” If this wording sounds familiar to you, it’s because I have written them many times before. They are almost “boilerplate.” I could keep them in a permanent file from which to “cut and paste” into articles I write, while they are roundly ignored by the anti-gun fools as they go about making more and more such useless, unenforceable laws while KNOWING they don’t work. It is my considered opinion that they care not about “gun crime,” and want to eliminate the very concept of self defense. Gun safes only make int impossible for a potential victims of gun crime to get their guns into action fast enough to avoid being killed. “Gun-free zones” only give illegal gun users a place where they can be pretty sure the law-abiding will not be armed there, making them easy targets” for their ILLEGAL guns. Other laws are just as useless. (Ammoland)

Why You Need A Gun

The anti-gun fools keep telling you that you “don’t need a gun.” But I say, you DO need a gun if you are to live in this world where there are millions of illegally-purchased and owned guns in the hands of those who would victimize you if they got the chance. In a perfect world, all guns would be held by those who do NOT wish to victimize others. But this not a perfect world, and you NEED to have a gun in order to equalize your chances of surviving when one of those illegal gun holders comes to victimize you, maybe to kill you. That’s just common sense. But anti-gun fools are not known for having common sense. Otherwise they would not continue to insist on making those unenforceable, useless anti-gun laws they KNOW do not work. Their laws are a “political solution” that does not work, but gives them cover and the ability to say, “I did something to solve a problem,” even if it doesn’t work. Frankly, the ONLY response to a holder of an illegal gun coming at you to victimize you is a gun in YOUR hand, you can use to oppose him. Nothing less will suffice. (Just common sense)

More Unconstitutional Laws

In New York State and Rhode Island, you must first ask PERMISSION of some unnamed, unknown bureaucrat to buy a gun. To accomplish that, you have to “jump through some hoops” and be “given” a CARD that says you can buy a gun—IF you satisfy that bureaucrat that you have successfully jumped through those hoops. That gives that bureaucrat “veto power” over your right to buy a gun, even though the Constitution says your right to “bear arms” CANNOT be “infringed.” Such laws ARE “an infringement,” and are thus unconstitutional. In Rhode Island, before you can buy a gun you must apply for, and be “given” a “Blue Card” that says you have completed a certain “gun training course” which makes it the same thing as that in New York. Unconstitutional. The same people who approve of such laws would be aghast if a “civics class” completion would be required before people are allowed to vote. I haven’t checked, but I’d bet other states have similar requirements. If not, they will be CONSIDERING it when they hear about these laws. (Bearing Arms)

Emanuel's Revenge

Dumocrat Rahm Emanuel, former mayor of the city of Chicago, and previous to that a close adviser to President Obama, once made a very honest statement. Something very rare for him. He said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Meaning when something bad happens, take full advantage of it in getting your agenda adopted. So when China exported the Coronavirus to the rest of the world, politicians all over—mostly Dumocrats, of course—saw the unique opportunity the virus offered them to get their agendas enacted. All they had to do was tailor the response to the virus so that advancing their agendas seem like it’s a good thing to do to “fight the virus.” The anti-gun fools were right up front in that endeavor. People saw that there would come a time when the holders of illegal guns would come for their property and wanted to be ready to defend it, and themselves, so they started buying guns in large numbers, which was “troubling” to anti-gun fools in office. So they set out to strengthen their useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws to disarm the law-abiding and let the lawless victimize them at will. Do not allow them to succeed, because when the panic is over, the lawless will still have their guns, and the law-abiding will not. (Just common sense)

Joe Just Doesn't Get It

Joe Biden just can’t seem to understand why the right to own guns is a “bulwark against tyranny.” He actually thinks the government would use a “Hellfire Missile” against people is they refuse to get rid of their guns. Nor does he understand that having guns creates the fact that, in order to take our guns it might mean a bloody civil war where a lot of people get killed, many on the government side, while they attempt it, He has a significant IGNORANCE about all things guns. He doesn’t know what a magazine is when he talks about “prohibiting 50 magazines in one gun.” Yet he wants to be president so he can sponsor legislation to regulate something he doesn’t understand. It reminds me of one state legislator who has sponsored many anti-gun laws who said, “Guns shock and sicken me!” So what business has she in making laws against guns? People who pass laws are supposed to at least be neutral. And have some kind of understanding about the things they want to regulate. The problem is, most of those making laws to “regulate” guns have no idea what they’re doing. They listen to the anti-gun fools and believe the BS they put out—then them make useless laws that only INCREASE “gun crime” because they disarm the law-abiding and make it easier for the users of ILLEGAL guns to victimize them. They just don’t understand that, or they REFUSE to understand it. (Washington Examiner)

Gun Grabbers Using Pandemic

They can’t just ban guns, or completely stop people from buying or owning a gun for self defense, because the Constitution prohibits ANY “infringement” upon that right. So they throw as many “roadblocks” in our way as they can. Each one is an “infringement” on that constitutional right, but they figure they can argue that it isn’t so. Like one state that has placed a $50 “fee” people must pay before they can even buy bullets. In other places, they “suspend” the purchase of guns “because of the pandemic.” I guess they figure people will start killing each other over a roll of toilet paper so they want to take their guns away. Of course, that doesn’t affect the holders of ILLEGAL guns—millions of which are out there already in the hands of the lawless, who every day use them to victimize us. All over the country politicians are further restricting legal gun ownership and purchase on a “temporary” basis. Yeah, riiiight. Temporary, until they decide otherwise, regardless of the progression of the disease, figuring something that has been in effect for a while can more easily be made permanent, while still CALLING it temporary. (Just common sense)

Bloomberg Is Right

I never thought I’d ever be defending former NY Mayor Bloomberg, but when you’re right, you’re right. They called him a racist when he said that most gun crime is committed by minorities. But that’s not just his opinion, it is fact. And it is NOT racist to recognize fact, no matter how much the anti-gun fools think it is. What we’re talking about here is the number of “gun crimes” that occur in “minority areas.” And the number IS higher than that happening in non-minority areas. What’s the reason for that? Many reasons, actually, chief among them is that is where most “street gangs” operate, and they regularly shoot each other and others as they go about selling drugs and committing other rimes. That they use guns in their efforts to victimize people is a well-known fact, and you can’t change that by denying it, or calling somebody who recognizes it a racist. They’ll probably call me a racist for this item, but that doesn’t worry me. I’ve been called a racist before, because I don’t let race get in the way of reporting truth. I am NOT saying ALL minorities commit gun crime. I AM recognizing the truth of the fact that a high degree of gun crime occurs IN “minority areas.” I don’t agree with much of Bloomberg’s policies, but in this case, he is right, even if some fools call him a racist for pointing it out. (NCFR)

"Second Amendment Not Absolute!"

That’s what Dumocrat presidential candidate “Sniffer Joe” Biden thinks, anyway, while he uses that to take away our right to SELF DEFENSE through gun confiscation. And to prove it he directs our attention to the FIRST Amendment’s “exception” for “shouting fire in a crowded theater.” But that is “apples and oranges.” It looks similar, but it is a completely different thing. Nowhere in the First Amendment does it mention “shouting fire in a crowded theater.” That is simply something some people SAID about freedom of speech. The First Amendment was not MEANT to be absolute, whereas the Second WAS. It excepts libel and slander. The First Amendment reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Nowhere does it mention fire in a crowded theater. The Second Amendment is very simple. It says, “[T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Though preceded by unnecessary words, THAT is absolute. References to an “organized militia aside, which at the time meant ALL THE PEOPLE, it still says unequivocally that we are allowed to “bear arms,” and that right “shall not be infringed.” NO specific arms are named, and that means ALL arms are covered. The government, at the time, was not “awash in money” as it is today, and they wanted those people to bring their own guns. From the writings of the Founders we can see their wish that all people be allowed the right to SELF DEFENSE and to own and use the means to that, a gun. Even against the government, if need be. (Just common sense)

Didn't Think It Through

A bunch of ignorant anti-gun fools descended upon the office of Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader, demanding tougher anti-gin laws. Mitch wasn’t even there, but if he had been, he might have asked them, “Just what laws would you have me pass?” They don’t know, and Mitch doesn’t know. That’s because there are no “tougher anti-gun laws” that will do ANYTHING to “reduce gun crime,” but will, in fact, INCREASE gun crime by disarming the law-abiding, making them “easy targets” for the law-breakers, who don’t obey ANY laws, much less ones that say they can’t be armed when they commit their crimes. One of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen was in W. Palm Beach, Florida, where the cops posted a sign saying, “No Crime Zone. No Criminal Activity Allowed.” Did they really expect a criminal to see the sign and say, “Hey! I’d better not commit any crimes because they say I can’t,” and go somewhere else to disobey the law? I don’t think so. Neither will law-breakers forego their use of guns to victimize the law-abiding because there’s a law against it. Mitch knows that. I know that. Why do those fools not know that? (Newsweak)

Anti-Constitution Fools

Each time I hear about yet another Dumocrat pledging to violate the Constitution, I have to laugh. They really think they will be able, in the long run, eliminate our rights under the Second Amendment. I hear people like “Sniffer” Joe Biden pledging to “come for our guns” and announcing that he will appoint Beto as his “gun czar,” I have to laugh again. This fool will never again set foot in then White House, except maybe as a visitor to the elected president, and he won’t be appointing any “gun czars.” Or should I say “ANTI-gun czars.” It is obvious to me that each one who pledges to “take away our guns” while SAYING they “support the Second Amendment,” they want to be a dictator and want to disarm us to make it easier to abuse us. I wonder about their sanity. With Joe, I wonder about his senility. But when they do, they are telling me they want to be king, or dictator, or whatever else they call the name of their intentions. There’s only one real reason for a politician to want to DISARM his constituents. That is so he can abuse them with impunity. Such politicians don’t want to get shot while they are abusing their constituents. So the “cure” is NEVER to vote for an anti-gun politician. Send them packing. (Just common sense)

"Only the Cops" Huh?

The anti-gun fools are constantly telling us that “Only the cops are responsible enough to have guns.” Oh, really? How about that cop who threatened a 17-year-old with being shot for trying to leave school to keep an orthodontist’s appointment? William Miller, 17, tried to leave school to keep an orthodontist’s appointment and the school called the cops on him. And this cop, when he tried to continue on his way after telling him he had a good reason, told him, “You’re gonna get shot if you come one f—king foot closer to me.” That’s the best he had. To try and frighten a school child with the threat of getting shot. This is a “responsible cop” who is one of the only people responsible enough to carry a gun. I don’t know what was going through this cop’s mind, but he just proved he had no business BEING a cop, much less being able to carry a gun. “Barney Fife revisited.” If this is the best Pasco County, Florida has to offer, that makes me afraid… very afraid. Granted, the kid was being somewhat of a smart ass, but that’s no reason for a COP to threaten to SHOOT him for being TRUANT. That cop is unfit to be around children. (Daily Mail)

In A "Free Country"

A free country that has a First Amendment guaranteeing freedom of speech, students are now having to SUE for the right to wear pro-Second Amendment T-shirts. That’s what’s happening in Waukesha County, Wisconsin, where students are reduced to having to SUE to be able to exercise a constitutional right to free speech and support of another. The school’s principal told the students that their shirts “violated the school’s dress code” and must be covered up. A clear violation of their constitutional right to freedom of speech under color of “dress codes.” The vice principal thinks banning T-shirts depicting guns helps “reduce violence.” A typical anti-gun FOOL thought. They say T-shirts depicting guns is not covered as “free speech” and the school is entitled to regulate them. WRONG! Just because you don’t approve of a pro-gun T-shirt doesn’t take away the student’s freedom of speech RIGHT. The T-shirts do not support violence. They only support a constitutional right, and there are judicial decisions supporting that. Those school “officials” are going to get a lesson in pro-gun case law when this case gets into court. (Bearing Arms)

Is She SERIOUS?

“MOMS against Guns (or something like that)” founder talks about “gun sense” and blames the “extreme view” of the gun lobby for being an “obstacle to her group’s goals.” In that she’s right, although the gun lobby’s views are NOT “extreme.” It has never been “extreme” to wish to be able to defend one’s self against the millions of ILLEGAL guns out there in the hands of law-breakers. Also being an “obstacle” to the wishes of the anti-gun fools is the unalterable FACT that nothing they propose has EVER stopped a single “gun crime.” Then they come up with such foolishness as to predict that “teachers with guns DOUBLES both the possibility of kids being shot AND the instance of suicide. Where they get such nonsense is unfathomable because there certainly aren’t any statistics to support that “flight of fancy.” They think the way to self defense is to make yourself DEFENSELESS, and that’s what’s behind their activities. That’s what they’re selling—and they wonder why a MAJORITY of Americans want no part of their nonsense. They claim that a majority supports them, and that’s a LIE. The majority is a lot more intelligent than they seem to be, which is proven by the fact that gun sales go up in major fashion after every mass killing. (The Oak Ridger)

Is He Stupid? Or Lying

I’ve got to go with stupid, considering all Joe Biden’s previous stupidities. Now he’s telling us that guns have killed HALF the American population. Which tells me he’s either stupid, or he is making up his own statistics. Then he tells us he’s “coming for gun makers.” On WHAT? For engaging in a legal occupation? I think not. Biden is like all Dumocrats. They say and do whatever they figure will get them votes, and hope we don’t know any better. The big problem is that there is a certain segment of the population that DOESN’T know any better because they don’t pay any attention to politics until just before an election, when the lies are flying. My own son is one of them. He’s too concerned with his own pursuits to pay any attention and he thinks Trump is “part of the problem” while Trump goes about making our lives better in many ways. Dumocrats want us to think Trump is a Fascist, and is pushing Fascism. That’s wrong, but that’s the crap they’re selling. Trump is the best thing to have happened to this country in years, but those who listen to the pap the Dumocrats put out are unaware of it. (The Gun Feed)

Ignoring Reality

It just proves the anti-gun fools have a very different motive for “getting rid of guns” than lowering the crime rate when they continue to pursue their silly, unenforceable, USELESS anti-gun laws in the direct face of the fact that, even as they pass laws against guns, violent crime goes down—before any of their laws even take effect. That’s because “concealed carry” is up. Meaning their laws have NO EFFECT on violent crime. And the only viable alternate motive I can think of is to completely disarm the American population for their own purposes. They’re ignorant of yet another fact: that law-breakers don’t obey laws. Then there are those millions of ILLEGAL guns already out there in the hands of the law-breakers, and those sold and stolen every day. So there is actually NO WAY they can eliminate all guns from the equation. I guess they’re satisfied to remove only the legal guns—if they can. Of course, if they are able to do that (doubtful), there are all those illegal guns out there, to victimize the law-abiding, since they won’t have guns with which to oppose them. Nor will the “government agents” who come to taken your property meet as many guns in the hands of their intended victims. Remember: the first thing despots do is disarm the population so they can walk right over them with impunity. (Truth About Guns)

"Protecting Us Rich Folks"

“Those of us who can afford it have the right to HIRE our guns to defend us. You ‘po’ ’ folks’ don’t have the same rights if you can’t afford to HIRE people to carry your guns for you. We don’t want to let you ‘peons’ carry guns for self defense, even though us ‘rich folks’ who can afford it can hire people to carry our guns for us.” That seems to be what Dumocrat presidential candidate “Little Mike” Bloomberg is saying when confronted about his ARMED SECURITY while mounting a million dollar campaign to DISARM us “peons.” That, alone, should eliminate him from the race no matter how much money he throws at it. The Constitution GUARANTEES us “peons” the right to “bear arms” whether he likes it, or not. And we WILL exercise that right, in spite of all the unconstitutional laws he can get passed. Not one single anti-gun law now on the books, or yet to be passed is constitutional, and ALL LAWS must conform to the Constitution of the United States or it is NOT a law, at all. The Constitution GUARANTEES us “peons” the right to “bear arms” whether he likes it, or not. And nobody who thinks he can circumvent the Constitution has no business being president. And that’s what “Little Mike” thinks, even while he denies thinking it while moving to disarm us and make us “easy targets” for the lawless, who obey NO laws. (The Blaze)

"Gun Control Hero"

As pro-gun people, we have many real heroes, one of the most recent being the guy who brought his gun to church in Fort Worth, Texas and killed a would-be mass killer before he could kill dozens of unarmed, defenseless people. Anti-gun fools confidently tell us a “good guy with a gun” cannot ever save lives, but that’s a damned lie. They do it, every day, but the liberal, anti-gun fool media ignores it, hoping we will not notice. But are there any real “anti-gun heroes?” Have anti-gun laws EVER saved a life, as legal gun-wielding folks have, on a regular basis? Anti-gun fools count former NY Mayor Bloomberg as a hero, discounting the many people who have died because of the anti-gun laws he has promoted and seen passed. But is he a hero? Not even! He’s a fool who isn’t intelligent enough to know that what he proposes does NOT “save lives,” and only TAKES lives by disarming good people, making them defenseless in the face of the ILLEGAL guns in the hands of the law-breakers. The blood of these good people is on his hands. That makes him the same thing as a mass murderer, and he should be in prison, not enjoying his $billions and lecturing people more intelligent than he is on “gun control.” One fool wrote, “How many people must die before you give up your guns?” And one wag made a reply I can’t include here, but it’s priceless. (Reddit)

Security Guard Illegally Arrested

This guy obeyed every law, advised the cop he had a licensed gun, and he was using bullets that are clearly NOT “hollow points,” according to the state’s own web site. But they LOOKED LIKE hollow points, so the cop (one Louis Flock, a Roselle, NJ cop) arrested him, claiming he was using hollow points—which he was NOT. He arrested him one block from is home on a specious charge, which immediately put him out of work because, as an armed guard without a gun, he could not work. The security guard, Roosevelt Twine, is finding it impossible to find ANY kind of work while the charges are pending and, obviously, he cannot afford the attorneys who are representing him. Soon, he will not be able to support his family, and well may go to prison for several years, on this phony charge. This is how “gun laws” are enforced in the “People’s Republic of New Jersey.” His attorney has set up a “Go Fund Me” account in his name to help pay for things, including his legal fees. You can contribute by going to www.gogetfunding.com/roosevelt-twyne-legal-defense-fund/ .Hopefully, Americans will be as generous to him as they have been in other “Go Fund Me” cases so this guy can get himself out of this mess. (AmmoLand)

I'm Repeating Myself

Every word I’m about to write, I’ve written before in this, and other spaces. I’m really getting tired of writing the same things over and over while being routinely ignored by the anti-gun fools. But I’m going to continue, in hopes that somebody will take my words seriously and cause them to stop making their useless, unenforceable anti-gun laws that nobody except the law-abiding obey. The law-abiding, who are NOT the problem, while the law-breakers just ignore them and get their guns illegally. A popular anti-gun law is the “background check,” which doesn’t do a single thing to stop people from killing people with guns, but just allows the cops MAYBE to apprehend the shooter—IF—the shooter got his gun legally, which most law-breakers—who ARE the problem—do NOT. In any case, it only would do anything AFTER the shooting happens and usually somebody is dead. “Gun-free zones” have NEVER stopped a single shooting in their “zones.” In fact, criminals and potential mass shooters SEEK THEM OUT because they figure they can be pretty sure the law-abiding there will not be armed, and thus will be defenseless. EVERY mass shooting has happened IN a “gun-free zone” for that reason. Meanwhile criminals, who just want to rob and kill people, do it more often than not in a gun-free zone. I could go on and on, but I won’t. I don’t want to bore anybody. In any case, maybe repeating myself will cement these things in the minds of people who read this blog so they can cogently argue against the misnamed “gun control” laws. (Just common sense)