Gun Lies Debunked

Anti-gun fools tell a lot of easily debunked lies, and here in the article linked below are ten of them, and the evidence to debunk them. Learn these and you can more effectively shut down anti-gun fools when they lie to you. One such lie is that silencers are illegal. Not true. They’re legal in 30 states. Buying one takes some doing, but 500,000 were sold last year. Another myth is that crooks favor “assault weapons” such as ARs, M4s and AKs is also false. They favor smaller handguns, mostly cheap ones (Saturday Night Specials)--which gives honest people with their Glocks, S&Ws and Remington 870s a distinct advantage. The lesson here is never believe what anti-gun fools say about guns. They’re IGNORANT on the subject and “make it up as they go along.” (The Gun Writer)

Bad Laws?

That’s what the Florida Sun-Sentinel thinks of the new Florida laws that keep teachers and other school “officials” from “going off the deep end” and giving children severe punishment for chewing a pop tart into the rough shape of a gun and pointing it at somebody, or just pointing their FINGER at somebody like it was a  gun, they don’t like the “stand your ground” law, either. Apparently they think you should “make like a gazelle when confronted by a criminal with his own ILLEGAL gun; IF you can outrun his bullets,  that is. Another one they don’t like is the “warning shot” law, so people can take VP Joe Biden’s advice without being punished. What makes THEM the “arbiter” of what is good law just because they buy printer’s ink by the barrel? (Gun Free Zone)

We Already DO That!

Anti-gun fools like to say it’s easy to buy a gun without any kind of a background check at gun shows. The infamous “gun-show loophole” that doesn’t exist. MRCTV’S Dan Joseph went to a gun show to see how they operate. What he found makes liars out of the anti-gun fools. To buy a gun, you have to fill out a form for the feds, then for the state police—who are on site. They do a criminal background check through their system, and those who don’t pass may be arrested for trying. Further, the vendor has the right to refuse a sale if he/she is suspicious. Does that sound like a “gun-show loophole?” When are we going to stop listening to their LIES and “made-up “facts?” (The Blaze)

What Changed?

Way back when, you could buy an “automatic weapon” in any hardware store for about $15. In those days there were NO “mass shootings.” Today, you can hardly get one legally, ANYWHERE. Now crazies are going onto “Gun Free Zones” everywhere and killing people. What is different now than then? Guns are hard for HONEST people who OBEY laws to get. So more and more of them are disarmed. Back then, every kid had his “squirrel gun” and could “bark a squirrel” at 50 paces or more. Today, kids only know guns as TOYS. They’ve never been told that if they point one at somebody and pull the trigger, they won’t have to say, “BANG.” The gun will do it for them as it kills whomever it is pointed at. The biggest mistake we ever made was in NOT teaching kids about guns. I remember a time when I was a kid, getting into my dad’s closet and finding a gun. Fortunately, it wasn’t loaded and I never thought to play with it. So I never killed anybody. Not so with many other kids, ignorant of how dangerous they can be to play with. Because we were afraid to teach them. (Aurora Sentinel)

"Shall Not Be Infringed"

That’s a simple statement, and should not be misunderstood by the people who are SUPPOSEDLY supporting the Constitution. But it has been PURPOSELY misunderstood by the “anti-gun” crowd. They SAY it means only members of an “organized militia” can be armed, but they’re wrong. There was NO “organized militia” in existence at the time this was written. Therefore, it could NOT have meant that. What it DID mean is that since EVERY ADULT under 45 was a member of the “militia” and could be called up at any time to defend our country, they could not be denied their arms. But anti-gun fools consistently ignore that so as to “muddy the waters” of gun control. This writer (manifestly in a local paper) recognizes that. (Joey Lopez/Aurora Sentinel)

Why Sen. Feinstein Hates Guns

She fancies herself as a “gun expert,” though her every move demonstrates her complete IGNORANCE on the subject of guns. I do understand why she hares guns, but like most liberals she goes completely in the wrong direction in her efforts to “control guns.” She consistently tries to limit guns in the hands of honest, reliable people, completely forgetting (if she ever knew) that criminals and crazies don’t obey gun laws; don’t obey ANY laws. She hates them because of her personal connection with the deaths of Moscone and Milk, by White, years ago, and which led to her being the next mayor of San Francisco and then becoming Senator from California. But that doesn’t excuse her ignorance in the way she goes about trying to reduce gun violence. Instead of making it harder for criminals to buy their guns out of the trunks of the cars of other criminals in the back alleys of the city, she concentrates her efforts on barring honest people (who DO obey laws, no matter how bad they are) from having guns. (SF Gate)

No Guns Involved

At least not on the criminal side. “On March 1st a group of attackers armed with knives stormed a Chinese train station, killing at least 29 and injuring more than 130 others before good guys with guns showed up to end the attack.” “China has used draconian gun control measures to keep the Chinese people disarmed. However, as the attack on March 1st reminds us, once a population is disarmed, a successful attack with more primitive weapons becomes feasible.” But as usual, the only people who are not armed in Communist China are the HONEST people who OBEY laws, cops and other government agents. Criminals, even in communist nations, still have no trouble getting guns. These attackers apparently disdained guns, and died for it (4 of 5 attackers were shot dead by arriving police) after killing 29 people and injuring 130. (Breitbart)

Completely Bananas

“School officials” have gone completely bananas on the issue of guns. They suspend students for just pointing a FINGER at another student like it was a gun; they punish a student for chewing a Pop tart into the rough shape of a gun, and they punish them for DRAWING A PICTURE of a gun. Talk about “taking it too far!” I’m beginning to believe these “school officials” have gone power mad, and are using gun hysteria as an EXCUSE to punish students for doing what kids DO. Surely they can’t believe students will cause harm to others with their FINGERS or a Pop Tart. I don’t think it’s stupidity on their part. I think it’s just attempts to exercise what little POWER they have over someone else. (Fox News)

Computer's Dead

Please excuse any problems created by the complete breakdown of my computer. This is not  a big organization with many computers. There's just me and one computer, which I had to replace. I hope to be able to post again tomorrow. It's a real hassle trying to get a new computer set up and I've been trying to deal with it all day. Again, I apologize.

RAY THOMA$
www.raythomas101.com

Moneymaking Propositiion

In Illinois, police agencies are “confiscating” (stealing) guns and selling them, and will not answer questions about it. They’re making a lot of money that way. Many people wonder if this is legal, but when you’re dealing with a police agency, he burden of proof that it is NOT legal is on YOU. Some sheriffs are not even selling them, but are taking ownership of some of the guns themselves. One sheriff is actually IN the gunsmithing business, giving him a ready outlet to sell guns he has “confiscated.” A spokesperson for the State Police, says such guns should be returned to their owners, turned over to the State Police (who will probably sell them), or be destroyed. They say once the case has been adjudicated the guns should be returned, destroyed, or turned over to the State Police. One of the things the State Police can do with them is “any other application as deemed appropriate by the Department.” Which means THEY can sell them if that is “deemed appropriate. ”Illinois Watchdog attempted to question them about this, and they were rebuffed. (The Daily Caller)

Mass Killer Fears Gun Owners

Eliot Roger, the 22-year-old who killed six people in California was worried about there being someone there with a gun who could stop his shooting spree before he could kill a many people as he wished. This is just more proof that armed people on the scene, unbeknownst to a mass shooter, could make a LOT of difference in a mass shooting situation—and has, several times. Most notably, to me, in Colorado Springs, Colorado church recently, where one tiny armed female stopped a would-be mass shooter who had already killed, in his tracks, by shooting him. They called her a “security person” because the church had asked her to ACT in that capacity when they learned she was armed. But in reality, she was merely a parishioner the would-be mass shooter didn’t know was there. But will the anti-gun fools notice? Doubtful. They’re “hard-wired” not to. (Fox News)

"Jim Crow Gun Law" Repealed

The cat’s out of the bag! Many gun laws were made by DEMOCRATS to keep guns out of the hands of blacks (PC Police, go to hell--I said blacks!). “Last week, lawmakers in North Carolina voted to abolish a Jim Crow era gun law that required gun owners in Durham County to register their guns with the county. Jim Crow gun laws like this one are a reminder of the racist roots of gun control — something liberals and gun grabbers don’t want you know about. Many state and county gun laws that are still in effect today were originally passed to keep guns out of the hands of blacks.” It’s all part of the effort to “change history” and convince the country that the REPUBLICANS are the racists when the REAL racists are DEMOCRATS. It’s a little-known fact (FACT, not opinion) that the chief opponent to the Civil Rights Act were DEMOCRATS In Congress, many of whom were members, some even founders and top officers of Ku Klux Clan (KKK). I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them were among the ‘night riders” who burned out blacks and hung them, for nothing more than being black. (Mississippi Gun News)

Hick Bashes Own Gun Laws

Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper now says “If I knew more, I wouldn’t have signed the laws.” He says he didn’t have full information about the laws, and by the time he got it, he had already signed them. Now he tells the Sheriff’s Association that firmly opposed the laws that he “regrets it.” But still he does nothing to stop the laws from being implemented, nor does he do anything to get them repealed. It’s all a bunch of liberal blather to get himself re-elected again in a state that values its right to self-defense. When one sheriff questioned him, he expostulated, “What the fu-k? I apologized! This is a GOVERNOR, dropping the “F” word, at a sheriff’s meeting! And he wants to be re-elected! One of the wimpy excuses he used was that “one staff member had said he would sign them, so he felt obligated.” Is the GOVERNOR, or a STAFF MEMBER running the State of Colorado? (The Daily Beast)

We're Terrorists

That’s what Hillary thinks, anyway. “Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke about her views on gun control [recently], saying she was 'disappointed' Congress did not pass a universal background checks bill after 'the horrors' of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. “I believe that we need a more thoughtful conversation, we cannot let a minority of people — and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people — hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people,' Clinton said during a CNN town hall.” The fact that universal background checks will do NOTHING to stop gun violence seems to be lost on her. Of course, there is a LOT that is lost on this woman, chief of which is that she thinks she can, as yet another anti-gun fool who is corrupt, she can get elected president. She thinks people who want to have the means of self-defense are “terrorists,” and, “in the minority.” Which is wrong, or the other anti-gun fools would easily pass their stupid limitations on our constitutionally guaranteed right. (Bearing Arms)

Crooks Don't Listen

Jack-In-The-Box restaurants nationwide told legal gun carriers to take their business elsewhere, in effect, INVITING criminals to come in and victimize them. In at least three cases, criminals took them up on that invitation, robbing their restaurants. In some cases actually SHOOTING people. Signs were probably put up telling people to leave their guns at home, but apparently these criminals either can’t read, or just don’t give a damn. They said, they want to “provide a warm and caring atmosphere” and “guns do not add to that.” How’s that working out for ya, Jack? If one or two legal gun carriers had been in these restaurants, maybe the criminals wouldn’t have come there. Whaddya think? (Jan Morgan Media)

Chicago Outlaws Gun Industry

Well, maybe not in fact, but in practice. Their new gun law has so many onerous details that you could probably buy a gun only within ONE BLOCK in Chicago, and they’ve probably go that covered, too, with “import laws.” Of course, that will do NOTHING to stop criminals from buying guns out of the trunks of cars in back alleys; but they don’t even THINK about that. They’re “getting guns off the street.” The fact that the only guns they will “keep off the streets” will be in the hands of HONEST people who will only use them to defend themselves against those criminals is lost on them, as it is lost on ALL anti-gun fools. The fact that their last “gun law” was such a disaster didn’t faze them, either. They’re DETERMINED to keep guns out of the hands of honest, reliable people. (Town Hall)

Obama Lies Again

One of Obama’s favorite lies is in support of “gun control.” He says, 40% of gun sales happen without a background check. He included, of course, even gun transfers between family members, BEFORE the gun background law was passed. The survey he quoted only sampled a FEW people, and happened BEFORE the federal background checks were put into effect. And he only got a 36% figure that way, so he arbitrarily added 4% to get a “round number.” Of course, nobody who pays attention is surprised that he “played with the numbers” because that’s what he ALWAYS does. Read the linked story to see his many more lies about gun control. This guy just can’t tell the truth. I think it’s a sickness with him. He’s rather lie than tell the truth, even when the truth would serve better. (Fox News)

What Would You do?

If Islamic terrorists sneaked into this country and attacked a place you were in, what would you do? DIE? That’s what would happen if the anti-gun fools have their way. NOBODY will be armed and be able to repulse their attack on a “soft target” (A soft target is one that has no means of self-defense). Those fools think the only things we need to defend ourselves against are local criminals. (They’re WRONG!)They’re short-sighted. In Israel, EVERYBODY is armed, and considered to be a member of the army reserve. One of my favorite pictures is one of a stout woman standing astride a terrorist’s chest, pumping bullets into his face. It makes it obvious that even stout middle-aged women can be effective defenders if they have a gun. But the anti-gun fools want to make us be UNABLE to defend ourselves if terrorists come here to do their killing, as they did in New York on September 11, 2001. They’re GOING to do that. It’s inevitable. So are we going to be ready? Not if the anti-gun fools have their way. The Japs had the right idea during World War II. They figured there’d be a gun behind every blade of grass, so they didn’t invade the mainland of the United States. Islamic terrorists are well aware that most Americans will not be armed in, say, a shopping center, so they can kill at will. (Bearing Arms)

Likely Fired for Defending Himself

And for stopping the robbery of the store in which he worked. Yes, he DID “break their rules” by bringing his gun into the store and, (heaven forbid) using it when a criminal tried to rob the store. But what did they expect him to do? Let the guy rob them, and maybe kill HIM? This is a personal defense issue. Such “rules” are WRONG and misguided. This guy didn’t MISUSE his gun; he used it in the proper manner to defend himself AND the store. He didn’t shoot at, nor threaten any innocent person at any time. He didn’t “make it plain” that he was “carrying” nor boast about it. But the bureaucrats in the store management will probably FIRE him, as stupid bureaucrats will do, in their ignorance. I just hope the media attention will help him get another job, this time with somebody who has some intelligence. This guy has a good attitude. “I’d rather be armed and not need it that not be armed and be victimized. I can always get another job”  (Hopefully, in Obama’s world). (Bearing Arms)

More Reason for More Shooters

What would you do if a criminal were beating the hell out of your daughter and 911 puts you on hold? Just let him continue? Not this man; he shot and killed the criminal. It was a glitch in the system, but that made no difference to this man, who was not willing to wait for 911 to send somebody. His call first went to the Fire Dept., and while being transferred to the police dept., it went to voice mail. So he shot one of the intruders. The others are probably still running. And that’s as it should be. People ought to have the means of routing criminals who break into their homes to assault and rob them, even if the cops NEVER get there. But that’s not how anti-gun fools want it. They say the cops can protect you, but they’re WRONG. And they’ll never admit it. This is more evidence of it. (Fox 8)

They Just Won't Face Truth

Bloomberg says, “Obama’s political problems hurt gun control.” Did it ever occur to him that what killed gun control is that their TARGET is all wrong? They’re going after HONEST people by making it harder for ALL people to be able to be armed, while doing NOTHING to keep crooks and crazies from getting their guns illegally? They make LAWS for people to OBEY, completely ignoring the fact that criminals and crazies do not OBEY laws—NO laws—not just THEIR laws. Has it ever occurred to them that they’re WRONG? Probably not. Liberals never admit to being wrong. They think they’re always right, no matter what the facts tell them. Maybe some day somebody will come along with a GOOD gun control idea. Probably not in my lifetime. (Breitbart)

Chi Gun Violence Down

In Chicago, despite the bloody weekend, gun violence is still DOWN. Fact is, it had a long way to go to really get below the days before Chicago’s literal gun ban. But in any case, it just shows that gun violence in Chicago is OUTSIDE what can be controlled by ANY law limiting gun ownership by EVERYBODY. Gang-bangers and other criminals will ALWAYS be able to get their guns, so such laws are USELESS. They need to make more laws making the USE of guns to do violence a crime drawing a longer sentence to keep the USERS off the streets longer. Further, such laws will discourage criminals from USING their guns to do violence. Making laws to allow honest, reliable people to CARRY their guns for self-defense is another category where laws CAN do some good. Letting honest people carry guns will NOT “create a wild West atmosphere,” as anti-gin fools say. I used to have a “carry permit,” and I never shot anybody over something trivial—in fact, I never shot anybody, period. (CNN)

They Act Like We Don't See It

“The anti-Second Amendment crowd and the mainstream media cheerleaders who act as gun control first-responders to mass murder by sociopaths have convinced far too many that criminals will stop acting criminally if only more and more laws can be enacted.” That’s not us, that’s THEM. We know LAWS will not stop criminals from getting their guns. They don’t OBEY laws. So they won’t “stop acting like criminals” if we make enough laws. They ARE criminals. It’s not an act. And if they need a gun to do their “dirty deeds,” they will get one, no matter WHAT the law says; believe it! But their goal is NOT to reduce gun violence; it is to DISARM all Americans to make their jobs easier when their “jack-booted thugs” come to take what’s ours. Believe it! Otherwise they wouldn’t insist on making USELESS LAWS in spite of SURE evidence they do not work to reduce gun violence. Criminals want more and more gun laws to make THEIR jobs easier. (Joe for America)

He Got Tired of Their Lies

This former anti-gun fool “got wise” to the rest of them when he noticed their many lies and simply couldn’t stay around people who LIED every day to support their craziness because there was NOT any REAL evidence to support their position. He went from a “luke-warm common sense gun control supporter” to a “doctrinaire gun rights zealot” because there were no lies he could find on this side. One of the things he learned was that banning things a lot of people want does not eliminate it, it just “drives it underground,” as did alcohol prohibition and drug prohibition, while increases its monetary value, therefore making it even more available as criminals see vast profits in selling it “under the table.”

One of their latest lies is the “74 school shootings” that didn’t happen. Their figures were made up as they went along, as is usual for them. They included gang shootings NEAR schools and got a “double whammy,” being able to cite them as both school shootings AND the shooting of “children,” not mentioning that those “children were young adults DEFINED as children for statistical purposes. Gang members who did their own amount of shooting of others. Some of them were of VOTING age. (The feds now consider them as “children’ up to age 26). They rail against “kids being killed by guns” and never mention that more (REAL) children die by drowning in a bucket of water than are killed by guns. The fact that they have to LIE to support their position shows just how WEAK their position IS. (Posse Incitatus)

Admits Gun Laws Don't Work

Bloomberg’s top paid gun-grabber quits, and ADMITS that the gun laws they make today, hoping to reduce gun violence—don’t. Mark Glaze, Executive director of Bloomberg’s “Everytown for Gun Safety” group, resigned while admitting that what they have worked for does NOT work. He says the measures promoted by that group haven’t worked in the past and would not work in the future, so why promote them? Gun control has never saved ANY lives. In fact, it has CAUSED the deaths of many people who were faced by criminals or crazies with ILLEGAL guns and they couldn’t respond, or respond fast enough. What they hoped to accomplish, according to this article, is NO OPPOSITION for government agents when they impose tyranny and exterminate minority populations. (Bob Owens)

Let's Just Be Honest

About gun control. The laws they’re making don’t do a single thing to stop gun violence. What they do is disarm honest, reliable people and make them unable to defend themselves when faced with an armed criminal. They know this, but they keep making them while they are responsible for killing people. The answer is simple: allow honest, reliable people to be armed, so they can “take out” these ILLEGALLY armed criminals or crazies, who don’t OBEY any laws, by surprise, since they then cannot know which of their intended victims will be armed and ready to kill them. This can reduce gun violence in the most simple way: kill the illegal shooters who never obey ANY laws BEFORE they can kill more people. But somehow those rabid anti-gun fools never listen when you tell them this.

Then they go out and gaily continue to make USELESS gun laws that simply DISARM good people while criminals and crazies never have any trouble getting guns; even LESS trouble where gun laws are tight. They say to allow good people to be armed would mean “guns everywhere.” But there are “guns everywhere” already, all in the hands of criminals and crazies. We need more guns out there to counter that. They talk about “children” getting killed by guns without mentioning that most of those “children” are gang-bangers who carry their own guns and kill people. They exaggerate the number of school shootings by including ANY shootings anywhere NEAR schools. They also include gang shootings OUTSIDE of schools. (Just common sense)

Rejecting the Solution

In the face of sure knowledge that “gun-free zones” not only do NOT keep crazies from coming into those zones to kill people, they actually CAUSE many deaths, schools still insist on keeping their schools as “gun-free zones” while KNOWING that criminals and crazies don’t obey rules OR laws. The solution to the problem, as proven in TWO school shootings since the Sandy Hook killings, somebody ON THE SCENE with a gun can stop mass shootings before they become “mass” shootings. In these two cases, armed “resource officers” (non-uniformed, I hope) were on the scene in ONE MINUTE and put a stop to the shooter’s plans. In these cases it was a “resource officer” who stopped the shooting. Resource officers are expensive, and many schools can’t afford them. So why NOT allow staff who have carry permits and training to be armed at NO COST to the school and are not in a uniform so they can be shot FIRST, by surprise? Too many “stone-headed” school officials disagree. That’s incompetence, but they ARE “in charge.” (Buckeye Firearms Association)

Yes, It IS!

A letter to the editor of the Chicago Tribune says, “More guns is not the answer to gun violence.” But, in his infinite wisdom, he neglects to tell us what IS the answer. Like most gun-hating fools, all he can do is criticize, but he can’t come up with a soluton. But in REALITY, more guns in the hands of honest, responsible people, IS the answer. If a would-be criminal gunman didn’t know if most of his intended victims were armed and ready to shoot him down the minute he starts shooting, maybe more of them would go into a different line of work. This writer cites a few instances where armed people didn’t stop a crime, but ignores the MANY cases in which a legally-armed person DID stop a crime. He says, “It’s time the NRA got behind ideas that truly make people safer,” but he can’t come up with any that WOULD. Typical liberal fool. (Chicago Tribune)

Stupid, Stupid!

According to the Wall St. Journal, 31% of self-described liberals don’t want their daughters to marry a man who owns a gun. It’s the new segregation. It used to be they didn’t want them to marry a black man. Now it’s a gun owner. Like owning guns makes you an undesirable in their eyes. What kind of fools are they? How would they react if a gun-wielding criminal or crazy invaded their space? Wish for a gun? Or just tell him to go ahead and shoot them? I can tell you want a gun owner would do; he’d shoot them, and they would threaten nobody again, ever. Liberals have never been known for logic, but this is appalling. Liberals still think defending yourself  involves DISARMING yourself, but what do you do when you’re threatened by a criminal or a crazy, neither of whom obey laws. They think a lot of things that are not only impossible, but STUPID. Yet they keep getting themselves elected to office, where they are dangerous since they can then ENFORCE their stupidities. (Virginia Shooting Sports)

Gun Violence NOT Rising

The anti-gun fools are constantly telling us how gun violence is growing at an alarming rate, but the numbers just don’t back them up. They’re LYING, as usual. But then, they USUALLY lie because the numbers don’t back them up on ANYTHING they say so they have to “make it up as they go along.” Which is not surprising. The truth is, the numbers show that gun violence is DECREASING, in schools, and elsewhere. But they don’t care. Their goal is to DISARM the American people and they’re well on their way to attaining that goal. Unfortunately, recent events tell me their efforts have hit a plateau and are now “spiraling downward.” Unfortunately, not fast enough. The “war on guns” is going our way, but now is not the time to think we have won and look the other way. We must remain vigilant and put a stop to their every move. (Gun Owner’s Resource)

"Hundreds" At Moms Demo?

Not a chance. The picture in the article linked below is the only one available from their “demonstration” and there’s probably a MAXIMUM of 25 people there. And they worked HARD to conceal that fact. Their “demonstration” was like a fart in a whirlwind, and just as stinky. This is a typical liberal effort to make their “demonstrations” look like more than a “piffle.” But they aren’t fooling ANYBODY, and they don’t know it. They’re still pushing for the same kind of legislation they’ve gotten in the past, which only disarms HONEST people and does NOTHING to stop the proliferation of guns in the hands of criminals, who obey NO laws. One of these days anti-gun fools are going to “wake up” and make some REAL laws, that WORK. But it ain’t agonna happen in my lifetime. (Time Magazine)

Obama Blames NRA

Obama says the “increase in gun violence” is CAUSED by the NRA and lax gun laws.” He doesn’t say anything about the fact that the gun laws they make these days do NOTHING to stem gun violence, and only increase it. They say nothing about the fact that gun violence is NOT increasing; it’s DEcreasing. They say we shouldn’t “paint Muslims with a broad brush” while they paint gun owners and the NRA with their own broad brush. Actually, it’s their gun laws that create unarmed victims for criminals and crazies who don’t obey laws. It’s their popular “gun-free zones” that would-be shooters LOOK FOR when deciding where to go and shoot people with their illegal guns. A “gun-free zone” never stopped a mass gunman. Never. In fact, it INVITES them to “come in and shoot us.” But they’ll never admit it. They’re too stupid. (Last Resistance)

Typical Liberal Politician

He says, “I hope tragedy will inspire action.” But what he means is, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Meaning, when bad things happen, use them to gain your goals. In this case, he means more inane gun laws that do nothing except create more and more unarmed victims for criminals, who don’t obey laws. For him right now, it means passing laws to make gun owners register their guns so the government will know where the guns are and who has them when time comes to confiscate them. Other than that, it does NOTHING to cut gun violence, since criminals ignore such laws. They keep doing this over and over again, even though all it does is let them, MAYBE find the owner of a certain gun that MIGHT have been used in a crime—AFTER the crime is done and the bodies are buried. Politicians like this have no imagination. These laws have failed to “combat crime,” ever. But they keep making them. People tell them these laws are useless, but they aren’t listening. They just want to disarm the honest people while doing NOTHING to disarm the criminals and the crazies. Now he’ll probably criticize me for using the word, “crazies” to divert attention from my point. (Last Resistance)

Liberals Hate Miss USA

Boy, did she ever p-ss them off! She advocates women learning self defense tactics to be able to fend off rapists, and liberals believe that they should “just lie back and enjoy it” when raped. To use violence in defense of yourself is bad, according to them. The winner, Nia Sanchez, is a fourth degree black belt in Tae Quan Do, and recommends every woman learn how to defend herself. Nothing “controversial” about that, huh? WRONG! Liberals immediately took offense and “went off the deep end” on her. Some fools said we should just “teach men not to rape.” A typical stupid liberal answer to anything. “Just teach criminals not to be criminals.” Impossible, but that’s their answer. Stupid! As National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea observes, “these people are living in a fantasy world, and want to force others to pretend that fantasy is true--and to suffer the consequences of not having been prepared for reality.” That’s the problem with liberals. They think they can make reality what they want it to be. One complained that she advocated “injuring their rapists,” as if that were a bad idea. I think it’s an EXCELLENT idea. Rapists NEED to be injured. Illinois State Police says she should pee on them to “turn them off.” They forget that some people LIKE that. (The Examiner)

Obama Pushes Confiscation

He praises Australia’s gun laws, which emphasized CONFISCATION of guns. Not “registration.” That came before. The fact that their confiscation and banning of firearms resulted in a 300% INCREASE in gun violence, he doesn’t mention. The fact that this action would be blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL doesn’t seem to bother him. And why should it? He has violated the Constitution on so many issues, I can’t even keep track of them all—and NOBODY has “called him” on it. So why NOT violate it again to accomplish his most cherished desire: to disarm Americans so he can do what he wants with them without appreciable opposition. Liberals HATE gun owners and refer to them as “insurrectionists.” They’d like nothing more than to see them all murdered in their sleep by Obama’s personal soldiers. If Obama gets his way, that could really happen, and a revolution will result. If we win, good. If he wins, we’re all dead. This is who Obama is. He wants to be a dictator, and he is using this issue to make it happen. (Bearing Arms)

Bloomberg Ain't Happy

He put out the word he was “cutting off” “Moms” while he slipped them money through the backdoor. And they screwed up, royally, calling his anti-gun crusade into question. “Moms” and their sister organization created by Bloomberg CLAIMED 74 school shootings since Newtown, which was a LIE. And most news organizations lapped up like a dog eats ice cream on a hot day, with NO “vetting” at all. Most of them were “gang shootings” NEAR a school, as brought out by journalist Charles C. Johnson, with “The Daily Caller.”. One wasn’t even a shooting. It was a gun FOUND in a kindergartener’s backpack that went off accidentally. This is how anti-gun fools jump on every gun incident to “prove” their case, even if it has nothing to do with a school. One “school shooting” they listed was a ten-year-old girl caught in the crossfire from a gang shooting OUTSIDE the school. One “shooting” was a suicide attempt and was NOT aimed at a school. What they do is “jump on” ANY shooting in the vicinity of a school, no matter what the circumstances, and CALL IT a “school shooting,” to bolster their phony figures. Bloomberg ought to just “shut it down.” Nobody believes him or his minions any more. (Bearing Arms)

Bloomberg's Henchwomen Lie Again

They say a “good guy with a gun” has NEVER stopped a crime. Funny how liberals tell easily discredited lies and insist they’re truth. What I’m about to tell you about is just ONE instance I could list to discredit what they say: In the St. Louis area, two felons tried to kidnap a young girl and were shot by her father. One died, the other went to ICU. Is this “evidence” that NO licensed gun carrier has EVER stopped a crime from being committed? Not even. It’s just ONE incident proving Bloomberg’s minions are LIARS. I could list all of them, but there isn’t enough computer space available to me to do it. I just don’t understand the thinking of people like Bloomberg, who think they can LIE with impunity if it serves their goals. (Bob Owens)

Why So Many Shootings?

Last week I sat here listening to the news reports of three (count ‘em, THREE) mass shootings going on at the SAME TIME. And I wondered why. It’s not because those phony “anti-gun laws” that only keep honest people disarmed in the face of criminals and crazies being so easily able to get their guns. Those laws are OBVIOUSLY not working. But don’t try and convince those anti-gun fools of that. They aren’t listening. The real answer is to ALLOW honest people to own and carry the means to self-defense, a gun. If there were more people in any crowd who owned and carried their own guns, it’s more likely a would-be shooter would run into a BULLET before he could shoot many people. The key is that he would NOT KNOW who might be armed so he couldn’t “take them out first,” as with armed, uniformed security. You can’t reach CRIMINALS, who don’t OBEY laws, with a law against anything. So that’s a stupid way to go about it and just makes it easier for the shooters. (Just common sense)

"Collective" Rights

One of the things most misunderstood about the Bill of Rights is that here ARE no “collective rights” enumerated. ALL rights enumerated there are INDIVIDIAL rights, contrary to what liberals tell you in their LIES about the Constitution. They tell so many lies about the Constitution (and other things) that those lies somehow become something to be believed, through repetition. They say the right to keep and bear arms is a “collective right” held ONLY if you’re a member of an “organized militia,” something that did NOT even exist when that august document was written. In the case of the First Amendment, it is only limited by TRUTH. The TRUTH is an ABSOLUTE DEFENSE in libel cases. Liberals want to stop people from telling the truth about them and try to say they were libeled when what was written was the simple truth. Obama, for instance, SLANDERED the American soldiers who told us Sgt. Bergdahl was a deserter and a troublemaker for a long time before that by saying they were “being political.” But the only person here “being political” is OBAMA.. (Just common sense)

What Is "Defensive Gun Use?"

Liberals claim that the instances of defensive gun use by honest gun owners who have a license to carry are few and far between. They get away with it because many “bad guys” are ‘run off” by the sight of a gun and are not counted by authorities because shots were not fired and no criminals were apprehended. Nobody keeps the numbers of crimes that are stopped by the display of a gun without shots being fired. But maybe somebody should START keeping such numbers to shut the anti-gun fools up. They don’t count it unless somebody is shot. Further, in the lists they (anti-gun fools) put out about “gun violence,: they INCLUDE shots fired IN SELF-DEFENSE and by the cops in their effort to apprehend criminals. This is how they LIE to you. They make up their figures as they go along or simply TWIST real figures their own way. (Doug Giles)

The Second Amendment

What you didn’t know about the Second Amendment to the U. S. Constitution: First, it does not “give you” rights. It RECOGNIZED the fact that you HAVE those rights; second, the Second Amendment does NOT “give you” the right to carry a gun ONLY if you are a “member of an organized militia; Organized militias did not even exist at the time it was written. Then, ALL THE PEOPLE were a militia and were REQUIRED to have guns to use when called upon. Liberals keep on talking about “reasonable restrictions” on gun rights.” No such thing exists in the Constitution. It says simply, “The right to keep and hold arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!” what part of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” do today’s anti-gun fools not understand? There’s more to it, but you’ll have to read the article here linked to see it. (Policy Mic)

Biden Oughta Shut Up

VP Joe Biden just can’t keep his mouth shut. Every time he opens it he gets somebody in trouble; mostly himself. But in the case of his advice to take a “warning shot” with a shotgun to scare the “bad guys” off, he put his foot SQUARELY deep in his mouth. In at least TWO cases where homeowners took his advice, they’ve wound up with charges against THEM. Joe might THINK taking a warning shot is legal, but it isn’t, in most places. Maybe if Joe did a little research before he opened his mouth, he might not get in trouble so often. But I don’t look for him to do that. He’s like a dud “Roman Candle.” Just when you think it won’t go off, it will—right in your face. (Bob Owens)

Torpedoing Yourself

 I’ve been watching Texas concealed carry proponents torpedoing their own movement by their excesses. They go around with automatic weapons on one arm and their infant children on the other. They look like fools. And they’re making it hatder and harder for intelligent people to take them seriously—and that hurts the pro-gun movement. It gives the anti-gun fools “ammunition” to use in discrediting them. Texas State Rep. George Lavender is trying to get his open carry bill through the legislature and is telling those idiots who right now insist on carrying their automatic weapons into businesses where they’re not wanted to please stop. At least, until he gets his bill passed into law. What they’re doing is HURTING those efforts. They’re their own worse enemy if they keep it up. (Bearing Arms)

Another Gun-Free Zone

Well, looky here! The Seattle Pacific University where a student monitor “took down” a would-be mass killer before he could kill more than one, is a “gun-free zone.” Shooters purposely AVOID places where there might be guns and people to oppose them, as one mass shooter confirmed recently when he said he had two choices of where to go, but stayed away from one of them because of “all those damned cops with guns running around.” I’ll ask again; will this change the minds of those “mindset in stone” fools who CREATE these gun-free zones? Not LIKELY. They aren’t smart enough. The proof is that they think self-defense involves DISARMING as many people as possible. (Bearing Arms)

Shooters Are Not Fools

The anti-gun crowd like to paint gun enthusiasts as “quick-shooting fools” but, as usual, that’s a phony picture they paint. For your information, the student who stopped the mass shooting one guy had planned at his school by RUNNING TOWARD the gunshots, not “running for cover.” And he didn’t have a gun. He pepper sprayedthe guy, and "took him down." Then another student jumped in and helped hold the guy down until the cops got there. This is the kind of guy who “likes guns.” Not an arrogant fool, like anti-gun fools think. Naturally, the media don’t tell you things like this because it doesn’t fit their narrative. They rightly call him a hero, but never mention that he is a gun enthusiast and NRA supporter. (Bearing Arms)

It's Not Working!

The current mindset on how to reduce gun violence that involves disarming EVERYBODY and not allowing honest people to own and carry the means to self-defense, a gun, is obviously not working. Criminals and crazies have no trouble getting their guns. I’m sitting her listening to reports of THREE mass shootings happening at the SAME TIME in different parts of the country, plus recaps of that Canadian shooting that killed three cops. That tells me that current law is NOT WORKING. But what do our ignorant politicians do? Make the SAME LAWS, over and over again, no matter how many times they fail, and how many innocent people die. Their latest push is for gun registration, which does NOTHING to keep criminals and would-be mass shooters from getting their guns from other criminals in back alleys out of the trunks of their cars without ANY kind of "registration." The solution is to allow honest people to own and carry guns for their own self-defense. They’re certainly not keeping guns away from the “bad guys,” so why not let us defend ourselves?

The cops certainly can’t do it; they’re always MINUTES away; the bad guy is there—right now. They can document your death and dispose of the body, and MAYBE catch the shooter,—later—which does nothing for you. You’re dead. When are these fools going to wake up to this fact? Probably never, which is why we need to GET RID of the current crop of anti-gun fools and elect someone who has a lick of sense about gun violence. Some people are “shocked and sickened” by guns. GUNS, not the criminals who use them to victimize us. But a gun is an inanimate object that can do NOTHING to harm you until used by a criminal or crazy. People aren’t going to “go crazy” and shoot people over a fender-bender, as the anti-gun fools say they will. People are much more responsible than that. But they WILL shoot a number of illegally-armed CRIMINALS, which will do the job a lot better than current laws. (Just common sense)

New Anti-Gun BIll

They’ve unveiled a new anti-gun bill in DC, aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of the seriously mentally ill. Which would be all right with me as long as it doesn’t make it easier for bureaucrats to just “declare” somebody to be “mentally ill,” based on their political stance. The bill would expand the list of those barred from owning a gun to include more people with mental health problems, as well as convicted criminals. It sounds good, so far, but as usual, “the Devil is in the details,” which nobody has released yet.. I guess, using the Nancy Peelosi standard, we’ll have to “pass the bill into law to find out what’s in it.” But I’d bet the way it’s written, it will make a LAW to keep crazies and criminals from buying guns, but will do nothing to stop them from getting them illegally, as usual. That’s what’s wrong with most anti-gun laws. (Minuteman News)

Tell Us Something We Don't Know

A recent study tells us the “Brady Gun Law” has done LITTLE to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. NO kidding; we told ya so. The Hill, a DC newspaper, says, “2 million gun sales have been stopped by the Brady Law,” but that’s a lie. Those sales were stopped by CURRENT law, NOT the Brady Law, because the would-be gun buyers were FELONS, who are ALREADY banned from buying, or owning guns. These figures, as is usual when gun-haters put out numbers, are wildly exaggerated or plainly FALSE. It was noted that murders and gun assaults went down since its passage, but it ignores the fact that other kinds of murders have ALSO gone down. Such deaths went down everywhere, even in states that did not have registration requirements before Brady. So Brady is riding a wave of lowering gun deaths, and claiming credit for it. (Duke Chronicle)

Sheriff Selling guns

This sheriff is selling guns he “confiscates” to a gun dealer, who then sells it to—who? He has no control over that. Does the dealer sell it, either directly, or through a third person, to criminals? He doesn’t know—and he ain’t talkin’. He says, “that would be political.” They’ve always got their out. The policy for the State Police says that, “Weapons that have been confiscated as a result of having been abandoned or illegally possessed may be transferred to the Department of State Police for use by the crime laboratory system, for training purposes, OR FOR ANY OTHER APPLICATION AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE DEPARTMENT,” the state law reads.” “Any other purpose ‘as deemed appropriate by the department,” which means they can do ANYTHING they want with the guns, including selling them right back to the crooks if that is “deemed appropriate” by the “department.” (Daily Caller)

NRA "Chides" Open-Carry Gunners

Strange headline, you say? Not even. They’re no more against open carry than they ever have been. What they ARE against is “going too far” in your support for open carry and making us all look silly, thus playing right into the hands of the anti-gun FOOLS. They think we’re all fools and they portray us that way. Meanwhile people in Texas run around openly carrying machine guns on their backs, daring people to tell them they can’t. This makes us all cringe while cleaning our guns. And the NRA is getting tired of playing into the hands of the “enemy.” (The Truth About Guns)

"Defense-Free Crime Zone"

That’s what they create every time they create a “gun-free zone.” What it means is that the only people who will be gun-free is the intended VICTIMS of the illegally-armed criminals. It is an “engraved invitation” for criminal to come there and shoot people. We keep telling the anti-gun fools this, but they keep not listening. They aren’t interested in logic. They swear there is NO SUCH THING as logic. What it tells criminals is that everybody who OBEYS laws will be ”disarmed for your convenience, so come on in and shoot us up.” I’ve always said we need a way to stop local jusges and other “authorities” from violating our constitutional rights with local ordinances and this law, passed in Mississippi does it there. (Mississippi Gun News)

Chicago Trying Again

They ignore the fact that a court order got rid of their “gun ban” and gun crime went down. They just want to stop law-abiding people from owning and using guns, Constitution or not. “Chicago has many law-abiding gun owners who handle their weapons safely and responsibly. The ordinance proposed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel to regulate gun sales in the city is not about them. It's about Chicago's other gun owners: violent thugs who kill innocents as well as each other while terrorizing countless citizens with the ever-present threat of death by bullet.” These people do not obey ANY laws, and laws should be made that take this into consideration. But will Chicago’s mayor consider that? Not likely. He’s as hard-headed as all the other anti-gun fools. (Chicago Tribune)

Killer Confirms NRA Position

The NRA (and all other intelligent people) say that would-be mass shooters PICK places where there will be no guns to oppose them and the killer in Santa Barbara confirmed it. He considered TWO places to shoot up, and chose the one WITHOUT a bunch of “damnable cops” because he knew they would kill him before he could kill as many people as he wanted to kill. That confirms the NRA position, and mine. And that of ALL intelligent people without a bias. But will the anti-gun fools listen? Not likely. They don’t want to reduce gun violence; they just want to disarm the populace, for whatever reason, or NO reason. (Doug Ross Journal)

Don't Build Those Jails Yet

It was looking like Connecticut was going to have to build a LOT of new jails to hold all the citizens who were DEFYING them and refusing to register their guns. It might not be necessary, after all. Gun Owners of America has filed an amicus brief in the action now in the courts to get rid of that unconstitutional law. If the lawsuit succeeds, they won’t NEED all those new prisons. They might need a few new mortuaries to hold all the illegally-armed CRIMINALS killed by legal guns in the hands of honest citizens who will be using them to defend themselves. Of course, the anti-gun fools will count each case of self-defense with a gun as part of their “list of gun violence cases.” That’s how they work; they also list police-action shootings on that list, too. Maybe one of these days they’ll learn that DISARMING honest people is NOT the way to reduce gun violence. But don’t count on it. They’re too cement-headed. (Western Journalism Center)

"Rise, Kill, and Eat"

That’s the title of a new book out to refute what the “anti-hunters” say about Jesus being a “meat-eater.” He’s getting a lot of criticism from the anti-hunting crowd, most of which are simply the anti-gun crowd. But their argument is stupid, as usual. God MADE animals to be eaten by SOMEBODY. If not humans, other animals. It was part of the DESIGN. So what’s wrong with killing and eating animals? Damn, it amazes me the lengths the anti-gun crowd will go to condemn the use of guns for ANYTHING, including hunting, which today is only a SECONDARY use. So Jesus ate meat. So what. He is supposed to be the Son of God, and as such can do no wrong. If he ate meat, meat eating is okay for Christians. That whole debate is inane and stupid. It’s like liberals asking, “What would Jesus do?” What he would do in all cases is written in the Bible. All they have to do is read it. It’s there. If it were not okay to eat animals, God wouldn’t have made us carnivorous. He’d have made us plant-eaters, like some of the dinosaurs. And I’m sure there would have been some liberals who would have decried that, too. “Think of those poor plants screaming as you crunch them with your teeth!” Some of their arguments (most of them, actually) are just plain STUPID. (Liberty Alliance)

It's Not About Hunting!

I don’t know why I have to say this over and over with nobody—not even pro-gun people—listening, I don’t know. The NRA and others cheapen the debate by insisting that it is about hunting, and they’re WRONG. It’s about SELF-DEFENSE, and the right to own and carry the means to that, a gun. Hunting is only secondary to the debate. The whole debate is over whether people have the right to self-defense, not to hunt. I’ve never hunted in my life, but I want to be able to carry a gun for self-defense so if some thug shoots me it will be the last thing he does in his life. Why do even pro-gun people ignore this? I just can’t understand that. The older I get, the more I NEED to be able to carry a gun with all the tall, strapping “bad guys” out there who want to hurt me. Old people (of which I freely admit to being) are “prime targets” for “bad guys,” and I want to be able to repulse any of them who accost me, in ways they can’t fight. It’s as simple as that. And like a trailer on a car, hunting rights will go wherever that leads. The anti-gun argument that if I had a gun in my pocket I’d be shooting people over a parking space is the argument of a damned fool. I had a carry permit a long time ago in Indiana and I never killed anybody—for good reason or bad. (Just common sense)

They Just Didn't Bother

The cops who went to “take a look” at the man who killed six people and himself because he “couldn’t get any” didn’t bother to check and find out that he had bought THREE guns recently. They say there was “no reason” at that time to suspect he might be dangerous. So they sent SIX cops to visit him. Since when do the cops send in six cops if they don’t suspect the subject might be dangerous? Like the writer of this story, I feel sorry for the next guy they “visit” as a result of somebody thinking he might be a danger to society. As a result, seven people are dead who might not be if they had taken SOME sort of action. (Gun Free Zone)