This article is basically asking, “If people are killing people,
why do we need more guns?” What a STUPID question that is! We need
more guns in the hands of HONEST people to defend ourselves against
DISHONEST people who ALREADY have guns they either STOLE or bought ILLEGALLY
from other criminals. They cite a case where cop was cleaning his gun
in a school when it went off. They ask, “If a man with a lot of
training in handling guns can make such a mistake, why let just
anybody carry a gun?” Which begs the question, “Who says this
particular cop HAD extensive training in gun handling? Some cops
NEVER get any training in how to handle their guns. And why was he
cleaning his gun IN A SCHOOL? They ASSUME that honest people carrying
guns will be CARELESS in the handling of those guns, which is another
STUPID assumption. What IS really stupid is thinking they can protect
people by DISARMING them while crooks, who don't obey laws, are still
armed, and can be just as irresponsible as they assume honest people
are. That picture of the writer shows even HE looks as silly as he
is. (OAOA)
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
Typical Exaggeration
This video is funny. Even if it does exaggerate the situation,
showing people shooting other people (and even themselves) at the slightest provocation.
Even the expression of the “commentator” has on his face shows
that he thinks the whole thing is so funny he can't keep from having
a =snarky expression on his face. The first scene is probably the
closest thing to the truth, although it is also an exaggeration. And
that beard on the central character is really phony. But “mutually
assured destruction” worked against the Russians. They had all the
nuclear weapons they needed, but they never used them because they
knew if they used them, THEY would perish. What a holdup man NEEDS
is to be surrounded by guns in the hands of his potential victims,
and never be able to be sure it won't happen. (The Gun Feed)
Monday, March 30, 2015
"Gun Ownership Is A Privilege"
Not a right, according to a judge in Glendale, Arizona, who put on
his crown and “confiscated” (stole) the guns owned by a disabled
vet, based on a “complaint” from ONE person. No charges were ever
filed in this case, but this judge, “feeling his power,” took these
guns away, anyway, saying, “Owning guns is a PRIVILEGE, not a
right.” Somebody needs to tell him about the Second Amendment to
the Constitution where gun ownership is GUARANTEED to every American.
There are way too many people in powerful positions who are either
not aware of this, or who just IGNORE it. Which, I suspect, is the
case, here. This is yet another case that shows the Founders made a
BIG mistake when they did not write a severe penalty into the
Constitution for people in government positions who violate it,
beyond reversing legislation. People like this judge should be
summarily REMOVED, and all his decisions reviewed with a view toward
reversal in other cases of wanton violation of the Constitution.
Judges SHOULD know better. (Student of the Gun Radio)
Just More Proof
Liberals
react with horror when we suggest that ALL restrictions on gun
ownership should be removed. Like those restrictions WORK to “keep
guns out of the hands of criminals!” They don't. Because criminals
don't OBEY laws, of any kind. They're CRIMINALS! By DEFINITION, they
don't obey laws. What the hell makes them think laws to keep felons
from having guns will have ANY effect on their ability to get their
guns ILLEGALLY? This case in Boston where a cop was shot in the face
is yet more proof that such laws do NOT work. So why bother to make
them? Yes, make laws against known felons having guns, so you can
prosecute them specifically on that charge when you catch them. But
don't include HONEST, reliable people in that restriction. The
criminals will get their guns in any case, so let honest people get
theirs too, so they can defend themselves. (Breitbart)
Sunday, March 29, 2015
Dearth of Gun Info
There
isn't much information out today about the “gun violence fight”
that we haven't already covered, so I guess I'll just have to
reiterate what I've said before—many times. That the kind of “gun
control” legislation they put out today not only doesn't work, it
is actually the CAUSE of much gun violence and many deaths, because
it gives ILLEGALLY-ARMED criminals a steady stream of UNARMED
victims. Their laws ONLY disarm honest, reliable people while
criminals simply either buy their guns out of the car trunks of other
criminal's cars in some back alley, somewhere, or simply STEAL them.
They worry about “creating a Wild West atmosphere” if everybody
is allowed to carry guns. Not so. As Robert Heinlein once said, “An
armed society is a POLITE society.” Which is probably why
illegally-armed gang members only OCCASIONALLY shoot up the
landscape. Every member of a “street gang” is armed. ILLEGALLY.
That's a known fact. But it takes something big to get them to “shoot
up the landscape.” As a rule, they are very respectful of each
other (except for rival members of other gangs with which they are
“at war.”). With Islamic terrorists running out of Christians to
kill in the Middle East, they are threatening to come here and kill
us. There are LOT of Christians here for them to kill, and they're unarmed. Therefore "easy targets." And there are
more of them already here than you know, READY to start killing. We
need to be armed, in order to repulse them. (Just common sense)
They're Wrong, As Usual
The
“Coalition to Stop Gun Violence” is, as usual, wrong. They point
out that one of the guns the Tsarnevs used during the Boston bombing
was “trafficked” through many buyers before it came to them,
which means, to them, that gun registration would have stopped them
from getting that gun and maybe have stopped the bombing, itself.
What “circular reasoning” THAT is! Haven't they ever heard of
ILLEGAL buying of guns? or simply STEALING them? Do they think
somebody planning to KILL a lot of people in a bombing will say to
themselves, “I can't buy a gun legally, so let's not KILL those
people.”? Damn, these people are STUPID! Yet they have the ear of
the media and MANY politicians, who themselves are incompetent. (Gun Free Zone)
Saturday, March 28, 2015
They Really Think This'll work?
Two
ministers in Joliet, Illinois are organizing a “walk to end gun
violence” after a “marked increase” in gun violence there. Are
they really stupid enough to think this will have ANY effect on gun
violence? As with other “gun laws” passed recently, it will have
ZERO effect on gun violence, but they will feel good about themselves
because they will have “done something” to stop it. Never mind it
will have NO effect. Anybody who proposes a REAL law to “end gun
violence” such as one that will arm HONEST, RELIABLE PEOPLE so they
can defend themselves, gets immediate, and violent opposition from
these FOOLS. They think they're doing a great job, but the number
of people who get killed by ILLEGAL guns tells us otherwise. But
they're not intelligent enough to “tumble” to that. (Joliet Patch)
Gun Ownership Declining
Not so's you could notice it, according to REAL statistics, not those
phony ones put out by the anti-gun crowd. Gallup Polls and FBI
Background Checks (not their phony “studies” that falsify
figures) prove it. An Associated Press story says gun ownership is
declining, but cites phony figures put out by anti-gun fools. I think
what they “find” reflects the person surveyed's reluctance to
say, “yes” when asked if he/she has a gun. The Associated Press
is depending on the word of people answering questions asked by a
stranger on their doorstep, and does not reflect the actual number of
guns in a household. Another indicator is the increased number of
concealed carry permits issued lately. (Daily Caller)
Friday, March 27, 2015
They Just Never Learn!
Background
checks do NOT stop gun violence. That has been proven time and time
again. But that proof falls on deaf ears to the anti-gun fools. They
just keep on making their USELESS laws that do nothing but make it
harder on honest, reliable people to have the means to defend
themselves from CRIMINALS, who have no trouble getting their guns,
because they obey NO laws, much less those that say they can't be
armed. Criminals LAUGH at these “feeble efforts” to “stem gun
violence,” knowing that the tighter the gun laws are in a given
area, the easier it becomes to get their guns ILLEGALLY. Background
checks are just ONE of the kind of STUPID laws they make, all the
time. They don't work, as do none of their other “bright ideas”
such as “trigger locks,” “smart guns,” and such. They know
that, but they keep on making laws that keep guns out of the hands
of GOOD people while making it easier for criminals to get their
guns. Maybe one day they'll get smart. I doubt it will be in my
lifetime, if ever. (Statesman-Journal)
Come On In And Shoot Us!
That's what students at The University of Nevada at Reno might as
well be saying to those who would like to do just that. They might as
well add to their statement that, “There will be no guns here to
oppose you, so come on in and kill as many of us as you want.”
That's what ANYBODY does when they create a “no-gun zone.”
They're IMBECILES if they think creating a “gun-free zone” will
stop someone bent on mass murder from bringing their guns on campus
to do it. I just don't understand the thinking (if there IS any) of
the people who create such zones. Do they really think that will
dissuade people from bringing their guns on campus? ALL campuses are
“gun-free zones,” but has that stopped the people who came on
campus and killed a lot of unarmed, innocent people? Not a chance! If
you want to get a bunch of people killed, just create a “gun-free
zone.” (Reno Gazette-Journal)
Thursday, March 26, 2015
Ban Airplanes!
Make
sure all passengers go through background checks. Oh, sorry: it was a
CO-PILOT who intentionally crashed his plane and killed all aboard?
Okay, ban PILOTS! Because BANNING things always “solves the
problem.” At least, according to liberals like Senator Diane Feinstein, who knows
NOTHING about guns, but who pretends to be an expert. For instance,
ANYBODY who has any EXPERIENCE at all with guns knows you don't put your finger
on the trigger until you're ready to FIRE. Look at the picture in the
attached story. Where is her finger on the gun she's holding? Oops!
You can't see it because of the airplane they "Photoshopped" in. But I've seen the original,
unedited photo, and her finger is firmly ON the trigger,
unconsciously threatening everybody in the room because if she
accidentally fires it, there's no telling where the bullets will go
(IF the gun is loaded). And again, experienced gun handlers know a
gun is ALWAYS to be ASSUMED loaded, and treated as if it were. Damn!
It sure would be nice if the politicians who push their brand of “gun
control” knew a little something ABOUT guns, wouldn't it? Of course, if they were more intelligent, they wouldn't make the kind of "gun laws" they make, would they? (Gun Mart)
FBI Falsifies Report
You
can depend on the FBI to tell the truth, can't you? Apparently not,
in the Obama administration. They're apparently taking a page out of
Obama's book and making the shooting figures not only look worse than
they are, but presenting a completely different picture than reality.
Their figures showed an INCREASE in mass shootings, when in reality
they've been HALVED! It's to the advantage of the (Obama) government
if mass shootings HAVE been increased, because it puts pressure on to
“do something” about it, and their usual “something” is to
make it even harder for honest, reliable people to buy, carry, and
USE guns in self defense. Meanwhile, wherever their “gun laws”
are the tightest, it is easier to get guns ILLEGALLY. John Lott, of
the Crime Prevention Research Center says there are indications that
the data was INTENTIONALLY altered. Which brings into question ALL
their “crime statistics.” (Weapon Blog)
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
"Ban Wal-Mart"
That's the liberal “logical solution” to the gun violence that
seems to be on the increase in Wal-Mart parking lots, one of the most
recent involves 17 people in Cottonwood, Arizona. ONE of the
“suspects” was killed, and ALL EIGHT of the responding police
officers was injured. Isn't that enough to have government BAN
Wal-Mart? You say Wal-Mart parking lots are “no-gun zones?” How
is it then that people still bring guns there? Don't they know it's
against Wal-Mart policy? Oh; you mean some people don't OBEY such
things? That's UNHEARD OF. You say it's NOT? You say banning Wal-Mart
is the wrong solution?” So is banning guns a better solution? They
probably won't obey THAT ban, either. At least, they have PROVEN to
ignore laws. You say criminals don't OBEY laws? What a novel idea!
So I guess banning guns is out of the question, too? No, you say?
You'll keep on doing that, even though it has been PROVED to be a
useless gesture? Oh. (Fox 8)
"Surging Gun Violence"
Cops
and citizen organizations are “disturbed” about increased gun
violence in Tampa, Florida last year. They're disturbed because the
number of gun deaths this year, so far, has almost DOUBLED from 2014.
What they don't say is that few, if ANY of those shootings involved
LEGALLY-owned guns. The news item doesn't even MENTION that as a
possibility. Most of them came from GANG killings, done by KIDS too
young to even be ALLOWED to have guns, but who do, anyway. That way
they don't have to admit that their misguided “gun laws” that
take guns away from honest, reliable people while ignoring the fact
that guns are more easily available ILLEGALLY to criminals CAUSES
most of those shootings as the criminals take advantage or the
DISARMING of their potential victims. They don't severely punish the
USE of a gun in the COMMISSION of a crime. Instead, they DISARM the
potential VICTIMS of criminals who are holding ILLEGAL guns. (WINK News)
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Liberals Hate This
It's a “common sense gun law” that makes them wet their pants.
It's a law to make “concealed carry laws” reciprocal from one
state to the next. To make states without easier “concealed carry”
laws respect the permits issued by other states that have them. There
are way too many situations nowadays like that in Maryland, where the
cops TARGET people from states with “concealed carry rights” and
search their cars WITHOUT “probable cause” to find any guns they
might have forgotten in their cars so as to ruin their day—week,
month, years. States that don't allow “concealed carry” work HARD
to punish people from those states that do for having the temerity to
do so. They ignore the Constitution and enforce ILLEGAL,
UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws in their state, hoping to punish people from
states who follow the Constitution. They want EVERY PLACE to be a
“gun-free zone,” even though gun-free zones get people KILLED. Of
course, they're not intelligent enough to admit that. (Second Amendment Insider)
"Targeting" Open Carriers
One of the
things gun grabbers are doing now is, when they spot a man in a store
with a gun, call the cops, claiming there's an “armed robbery going
on,” hoping the cops will KILL that man when he leaves the store,
thinking (falsely) that he just robbed the store. That happened to
Eric Scott, who is a LICENSED gun carrier, and was “targeted” by a
“rent-a-cop” in a Las Vegas COSTCO store where was shopping. The
security guard told him to leave, but the manager told him he could
stay. That pissed the security guard off, so the cops were called (not by the store
manager) and given the false information that Scott was robbing the
store. They waited outside, and when Scott came out, they confronted
him, and ended up shooting him to death—on the phony word of that
“rent-a-cop,” in OPPOSITION to the orders of the store manager.
Which makes him a MURDERER. There are many other instances of this,
and in these cases, the cops are WAY too quick to shoot, ending up
killing INNOCENT legal gun carriers—which is the GOAL of the
“gun-grabbers.” They're really getting “down and dirty,”
folks! They use cops top “do their dirty work.” (Daily Caller)
Monday, March 23, 2015
NY: "Gun-Free Zone"
And predictably, their violent crime rate
went UP 21%. And that's LOW compared to some other “gun-free”
cities. They've even got microphones in certain places, supposedly
to pick up the sound of gunshots so they can get there quickly. But
those microphones can also pick up conversation, so if you have some
“anti-government views,” you'd better keep them to yourself
around those microphones (IF you can tell where they are). New York
City is supposed to be “a safe place” because of their “draconian
gun laws.” But it is NOT. It is one of the most UNSAFE cities on
the planet. It's a “bait and switch” for them to say that, so
you'll come there and, after living there a while, find out the truth
that you aren't safe, at all. Just like their “bait and switch”
ad campaign all over the country telling businesses to move to New
York and not have to pay state taxes for ten years. What they don't emphasize is that after you've been there ten years and are well-entrenched and
can't afford to move, THEN they hit you with what amounts to the
highest taxes in the nation. (Last Resistance)
Gunfight At the "Wal-Mart Corral"
And
here I was led to think there would never, ever, be a gun problem in
a Wal-Mart parking lot after their decree that it was a “gun-free
zone.” So how is it POSSIBLE that there have been gun fights in
Wal-Mart parking lots TWICE, just this week? The first in my own, personal Wal-Mart. In the most recent “gun
fight in the Wal-Mart parking lot,” civilians actually shot at
responding police officers! You'd think they'd figure it out that
their silly “no gun zones” are USELESS and only INVITE gun-play
there. I really feel sorry for all those fools who “cling to their
damnfool notions” that criminals OBEY laws and rules. They think
all they have to do is make a rule against guns and criminals (who
don't obey laws OR rules) will leave their guns at home when coming
there. They're proved wrong time and time again, but they maintain
their fool notion. (The Blaze)
Sunday, March 22, 2015
"Collects Guns? He's Crazy!"
That's what they figure here. This was
originally a child safety action, but soon became a gun-control
issue. This government has been making gun ownership a reason for
confiscating guns for a while, now. And this is just one case of it.
They can't just BAN guns, so they make it as hard as possible on
people who HAVE guns. It's a case of law enforcers DEFINING the law
to suit themselves. In this case, just the fact that this guy has a
gun collection means he has “mental issues.” He doesn't, but they
SAY he does, and their “pet judge” accepts their bullcrap, so it
happens. This judge has ordered that there be no guns in this guy's
house until his kids are ALL over 18. The man argued that the court
erred when it ordered him to get rid of his guns, and the court
seemed to agree. But they still made getting rid of his guns a
condition to allow him to keep his children. What gives? This is an
example of TWO of my “pet peeves,” “gun control” and “child
protection” come together—and we know how the child protectors
flout the law while ABUSING children in the NAME of child protection.
(Washington Post)
Machete Attack
A man with a machete attacked people at the New Orleans Airport.
This item says he attacked TSA agents, but he attacked passengers
first. The passengers used their bags to defend themselves before the
TSA got involved and stopped him, with what? Wait for it—GUNS. It's
unusual for armed enforcement agents to be around when somebody
attacks people, but this was an AIRPORT. If he had attacked somewhere
else, where people aren't allowed to have guns, there's no telling
how many he could have killed before a “good guy with a gun”
could have showed up and kill him, as they did, here. But only
because they were already there.. It's a PROVEN FACT that allowing
honest people to carry guns will NOT create a “Wild West
atmosphere” where people are killed over trivial things like
fender-benders. Even ILLEGALLY-armed CRIMINALS mostly don't do that,
and they already HAVE guns. But you'll never convince the “gun
control industry” of that. They want to DISARM America, and they're
DETERMINED to do it, in SPITE of facts. (UPI)
Saturday, March 21, 2015
Ignoring "Routine"
In New Jersey, authorities normally give new gun owners who have
applied for “concealed carry” permits a “grace period” long
enough for the permit to come through. In some areas run by FANATICAL
anti-gun
fools, they twist things to suit themselves so as to get convictions
on honest people who have followed the law in every way it is USUALLY
observed. Now comes a man who has done so, who “ran afoul” of
such a fanatic police agency in New Jersey, that IGNORED the “grace
period” usually given in such cases (which they CAN do, since it
is something they “arbitrarily do” and is not the law.) This kind
of cop just wants to hurt people who own guns (and are not cops) and
doesn't care that by so doing, he is ruining this man's entire LIFE
and hopes for a career in law enforcement. It's not the individual
offense that counts, it's the EFFECT on this man's life that's
important. Yes, those cops don't HAVE TO observe the “grace period”
normally given. But this guy followed the law and procedure as he
knew it, not knowing that some FANATIC would change things to suit
himself. I hope governor Christie is smarter than those cops. (Julie On Politics)
Friday, March 20, 2015
They Gotta Be Racist!
Pro-gun groups are organizing against the
ascension of Loretta Lynch to the office of Attorney General. Of
course, the only reason they would do that is because she's black.
Never mind she's as unalterably AGAINST Americans having guns for
self-defense or any other reason. Never mind she is an “Eric
Holder clone” and will most likely continue his policies of
refusing to enforce laws Obama doesn't want enforced, ESPECIALLY
those laws HE has broken. Holder has been a staunch supporter of the
lawlessness of this president, refusing to recognize his lawlessness
even as congressional committees “investigate” Obama's
lawbreaking every day without results, because Holder will not allow
anybody to REALLY provide information that might indicate Obama's
guilt and criminal actions. Federal attorneys who have tried have
been summarily FIRED while others have “backed off” after being
WARNED. So the ONLY reason in the liberal mind to oppose her is she's
black—their usual “fall-back position” when they're opposed.
(The Hill)
Always Some Fool Willing
There's always some fool willing to have a law
made to do something unconstitutional. Now comes this “feminist”
reporter who thinks ALL guns should be CONFISCATED, especially from
MEN. This feminist “reporter” (Andrea Grimes), who works for the lefty
woman's site, “Reality Check” (misnamed, of course—they always
misname things), says we “need to stop 'giving guns' to everybody,
but mostly to white guys” (We don't “GIVE” guns to ANYBODY.
They have to BUY them). Funny: liberals call anybody who disagrees
with them (since Obama) racist, but then they propose their own
racist ideas. Unconstitutional, too. This fool is obviously a
gun-hating, man-hating idiot and it's a shame ANYBODY listens to her
tripe. She makes a blanket statement that “men aren't responsible
enough to handle guns,” which is patently bigoted and false. But
she's already announced her bigotry with her ideas about guns. Hope
she never gets elected to any lawmaking body. If she did, we'd
constantly have to be “pushing her aside,” which is what we
should do with ANYBODY, male or female, with such fool ideas. (Daily Caller)
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Anti-Gun Cop "Wises Up"
I've
often said that gun-grabbers aren't smart enough to “open their
eyes” and see the “forest for the trees.” But at least one did.
Jack McCauley, once the commander of the licensing division of the
Maryland State Police, thought allowing more people to carry guns
legally would be a bad thing. But after “being schooled” by gun
advocates, he changed his stance. He used to decry the thought of the
“average Joe” being able to have a gun, completely forgetting
that millions of “average Joes” ALREADY have guns, ILLEGALLY.
Most of them are gang members, and ALL of them are criminals.
Criminals do not OBEY laws (duh!). He was made to SEE this, and made the
right decision. I wish more gun grabbers were as intelligent as this
one. Most of them have their minds made up, so they don't want to be
“confused by facts.” (Personal Liberty)
Target Is "Gun-Free"
So how did this happen? The other day a girl AND her dog were shot in
a “drug deal gone bad,” which is “code” for “it'll never be
solved.” Looks like one drug dealer at least, doesn't give a good
DAMN about Target's “gun-fee” rule. He brings his gun right along
with him when he goes into the Target parking lot to do a drug deal.
How many times must the gun-grabbers' laws be proved USELESS before
they “get smart” and stop making them? My thinking says, NEVER.
They just don't have the INTELLIGENCE to realize ANYTHING. They're
DETERMINED to “disarm America” and will do it, any way they can,
meanwhile making it much easier for CRIMINALS to get their guns. It's
a proven fact that guns are much easier to buy ILLEGALLY in places
where anti-gun laws are the tightest. But they're too dim to
understand that. Nor will they EVER admit that crime goes DOWN
wherever guns are the easiest to get LEGALLY. I might add that I go
to this very store REGULARLY. But no more. From this day forward, I
will no longer enter a “no-gun zone.” (ABC 7 Denver)
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Will Terrorists Attack Our Schools?
Will that happen? Will Islamic terrorists shoot up schools in
America? Why not? They love to kill Christians, and American schools
are filled with them. And they've been filing through our unprotected
border for years unopposed, setting up their “secret cells” and
waiting for orders from their “handlers.” They mostly only attack
“soft targets,” and schools are NOTORIOUSLY soft targets, since
they are automatically “gun-free zones,” which means there will
be NO GUNS there to oppose them. They like that. That means they can
kill a lot of innocent people without worrying about being shot,
themselves. And policicians help them by KEEPING schools “gun-free
zones.” If ANYBODY, even a SURVIVOR of one of those school
shootings, introduces a law to allow legal gun carriers to carry
their guns into schools, they oppose them in a “knee-jerk”
reaction. The Japanese refused to attack the American mainland for a
very good reason: they thought “there would be a gun behind every
blade of grass,” and they were right—then. But today, it's
different, thanks to the gun-grabbers. And we will regret that when
Islamic terrorists start killing our CHILDREN in our “gun-free”
schools. Does ANYBODY think Islamic terrorists care that they are
breaking the law by bringing guns into schools? Probably not, since
they're out to violate much more serious laws by killing people.
(Second Amendment Insider)
"Choking 'Em Out"
That's
what Obama's goons are doing to gun-makers and sellers. They're
putting pressure on banks to deny them banking services on the basis
of their being a “reputation risk.” Remember, these are LEGAL
BUSINESSES that Obama's goons are setting up to “choke out of
business” on a false premise. Gun makers and sellers are NOT a
“reputation risk.” They are a LEGAL business that Obama just
doesn't like. If I were in the gun business, I'd file SUIT against
any bank that refused my business, accusing them of DISCRIMINATION.
And I'd WIN, unless Obama gets to the courts, too—which he may have
done. For whatever Obama wants, “the fix” seems to be in, legal
or not. What he's doing here is PATENTLY ILLEGAL, but he's doing it,
anyway. He cares NOT about the legality of ANYTHING he does. If he
wants it, he does it. And so far, NOBODY has the GONADS to oppose
him. (Wholesale Direct Metals)
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
Eric Holder Clone
Eric Holder is leaving, Hurrah! In his place is
scheduled to be Loretta Lynch, a female clone of Eric Holder.
Activists have gotten more than 148,000 signatures on a petition in
opposition to her appointment. The president is SUPPOSED TO “respond”
to a petition containing more than 100,000 signatures. They want to
end up with more than 200,000 signatures. Does ANYBODY think that
will make a WHIT of difference to Obama? How many previous petitions
containing more than 100,000 signatures has he ignored? It's a known
fact that Obama ignores any and ALL petitions, does just what HE
wants, and to HELL with what the American people want. He is, after
all, a KING, you know. Whoever he appoints is EXPECTED to be
“approved” by this, the SECOND “compliant Congress” lately,
Democrat or Republican. Yes, the Republicans now control Congress,
for whatever THAT'S worth. They're ACTING like they're Democrats. (National Association for Gun Rights)
Pulling Out in Droves
Members of Michael Bloomberg's “Mayors Against
Guns” are deserting Bloomberg in bunches. More than 50 have left
the group recently. The mayor of Poughkeepsie, NY had this to say
when he resigned from the group: ”[Mayors Against Guns] became a
vehicle to promote his personal gun control agenda—violating the
Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens . . . [Mayors Against
Guns] intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding
citizens,” This sums it up nicely and says what we've been saying
about it on a regular basis. Now it is being said by one of his
(formerly) staunchest supporters who finally “wised up.” Now if
more of the mayors he has duped begin to wise up, maybe his
organization will fall apart and he will be out of the “gun-grabbing”
business. That can only be a GOOD thing, This fool losing his
anti-gun group. (NAGR)
Monday, March 16, 2015
Denver In Trouble
Chicago-style trouble. We know that Chicago has some
of the tightest anti-gun laws in the nation, coupled with the highest
gun violence rate in the nation, as well. Now Denver, Colorado is in
the same kind of trouble. Chicago had 5 shootings over the weekend (update: the number now is 6),
and so did Denver. Denver was lucky in that it had fewer good shots,
and thus fewer people killed in those shootings. I keep telling them
that tight gun laws as we know them today do not reduce gun
violence, they INCREASE it. But try and tell the anti-gun fanatics
that. They make all kinds of excuses for the gun violence statistics
in these two cities (and others in a similar situation) that allows
them to deny their “laws” are the cause of anything. They even
pony up stats that make it look like their laws are actually doing
some good, while people are DYING because of them. (BET)
They're Always Trying
A man in Connecticut died after being shot with a stun
gun. The medical examiner says that there is NO evidence the stun gun
was a factor in his death—but or course, the liberal media says it
was, without reservation or the use of words such as “alleged,”
or “probably.” The American Civil Liberties Union in Connecticut
said, “Stun guns have been linked to the deaths of people
throughout Connecticut.” No proof of of anything, but a bland
statement of their imagined “fact” gthat has not been questioned. The fact is, there has been
NO time when a stun gun was the CAUSE OF DEATH in those cases. Only
that they were used. A FIST can be a deadly weapon, too. But you
can't license or ban a man's fist. (NBC Connecticut)
Sunday, March 15, 2015
Weapons Are Everywhere
You just have to recognize them. This video
tells you about a number of specially designed weapons known only to
a few self-defense specialists. But don't even ASK me where to get
them. Those “ripper rings” especially intrigue me. It make me
think of many other items that can be used in the same way-- like a
ring of keys, for instance. And it doesn't have to be a BUNCH of
keys. Just ONE key between the fingers can do a lot of damage to an
attacker. Another excellent weapon can be found in major book stores.
It is designed to hold the pages down while you're reading and eating
so that you don't have to hold the pages down with one hand while
eating with the other. It looks like a policeman's “slap-stick,”
and can be used as one. But with two heavy metal pieces on each end,
it is very effective in use against an attacker. But don't try and
use it to BE an attacker. That'll get you a long jail term..
Not
because of what you used, but because you were the attacker. Not so because it is a weapon. It is NOT.It is being sold in major book stores all over the country. A heavy
ash tray, or anything heavy that can be thrown or used as a club. Heavy lamps have been
used many times effectively. You just have to have the right
“mind-set” to look around you all the time and SEE a weapon where
others do not. You can buy large ball bearings, which are excellent
for throwing, and they can be bought legally in any sporting goods
store. They are not weapons unless USED as such. I used to carry a
2-cell aluminum flashlight (available in drug stores everywhere) in
my back pocket. And an encounter with a cop in the line at a
convenience store reminded me of a basic truth: It's not a weapon
unless you USE it as one. He told me it could be considered a weapon,
and I replied that, if I ever used it as one, we could discuss it
then. That got a laugh out of him. It reminded me that there are MANY
things, all around us, that can be used effectively, as a
self-defense weapon, if we just look around us and SEE them. (WesternShooting Journal)
"Only Cops Are Smart Enough?"
That's
what a top Palm Beach sheriff is saying, in commenting on legislation
now in Tallahassee (the state capital). He says only cops are able to
learn how to PROPERLY handle weapons. How arrogant THAT is! Who are
cops? Civilians who have gone through training—and all of THEM are
not responsible in the handling of their guns, even after all their
training. I've seen too many stories about cops "going off the deep end" with their guns. What makes him think “private citizens” are not capable
of learning how to properly shoot and handle guns—or how to be
responsible abut it? This kind of thinking is a result of the “us
or them” thinking in the minds of many cops, which divides the
world into two groups: cops and non-cops, with non-cops somehow not
being as smart as cops. This kind of thinking, if it gains
“traction,” can set back self-defense a LOT. (CBS 12 News)
Saturday, March 14, 2015
Self-Defense Ruled Illegal
This judge “reasoned” that, since stun guns were not in general
use, nor had yet to be invented at the time the Constitution was
written, the Second Amendment did not recognize them when weapons
were ruled to be necessary for survival. Just the opposite of the way
they falsely misread the Second Amendment to mean that guns were only
necessary for members of an “organized militia,” something that
did not exist then. But the comparison doesn't work, because the
Second Amendment doesn't JUST cover “weapons” like guns. It is
there to recognize that SELF-DEFENSE is an inherent right and the
ownership and use of guns, being one way to that end, must be
maintained. But it did NOT specify guns as the ONLY protected weapon,
yet invented, or not.
Yes,
a stun gun is a recent invention. But is a NON-LETHAL method of
self-defense and is useful because it WORKS. A FIST is an effective
weapon too, but it CANNOT be made illegal to carry (or they would).
The judge, in Massachusetts (where else), says the woman in the case
should get a license and carry a gun—something almost IMPOSSIBLE to
do in Massachusetts, so she'll probably either be killed, or be
forced to become a criminal to survive if she does get a gun. They
also approve her using pepper spray, whose usage as a defensive
weapon is ALSO recent. Fortunately, like Obama says, this is only
ONE JUDGE, and we don't need to follow his orders outside of
Massachusetts. (Federalist Papers Project)
Unbelievable Stupidity
I just can't believe
the STUPIDITY of certain residents of Ferguson, MO, for whom facts
just don't matter. They already have their minds made up. Even though
the Attorney General himself (who is one of the co-conspirators in
the attempt to start a race war on the backs of Ferguson residents)
said the cop was in the RIGHT when he shot and killed Michael Brown,
and that he NEVER raised his hands and said, “don't shoot”, a
story that is SUPPORTED by witnesses who are not criminals,
themselves, answer confidently that he DID when asked. They don't
care a WHIT about the FACTS. All they want to tell us is what they
WANT us to believe. I should ask them: “Who do you call when YOU
are threatened by such goons as Michael Brown?” They'll probably
return to their “fall-back position” and call me a racist because
it's a question they CAN'T answer. They'll call me a racist for this,
too: I can tell by their voices that those lying witnesses are all
black. I feel sorry for the white residents of Ferguson. (Daily Mail)
Friday, March 13, 2015
It's A Fabrication
Holder's “study”
that “proves” Ferguson is a “racist” police force is a bunch
of “massaged” figures and lying inferences. For instance, the
population of Ferguson is 67% black. Nationwide, blacks are 12.5%,
but commit 50% of the crimes. Similar figures rule in Ferguson, but
the Ferguson cops make fewer arrests of black persons than the
national average. So where's the racism? It's being INVENTED by
Holder, who is carrying Obama's water in trying to PROMOTE a “race
war” for their own purposes. Their purposes being to make laws and
regulations to have tighter CONTROL over the populace. Nationally,
blacks make up 50% of prison populations, which is FIVE TIMES their
population numbers. Liberals complain about that, IGNORING the fact
that they commit far more crime than do whites. The fact is, you can
make “statistics” say anything you want, by IGNORING stats that
don't agree with your thesis—and that's what Holder did. (Yahoo Photos)
They Wonder Why We Want Guns
The
anti-gun fools try and paint people who want to be able to carry and
use the means to self-protection, a gun, as being “obsessed” with
guns.” Not true. What we ARE “obsessed with” is being able to
defend ourselves against the MILLIONS of “gang members” in this
country, hundreds, even THOUSANDS of them living right in your
neighborhood, each one of them holding an ILLEGALLY-obtained gun
which they'll use at the drop of a hat. And they'll even drop the
hat. My grandson had a job in a convenience store right down the
street from where I live and had to quit, due to harassment from gang
members. Add to that the FACT that Islamic terrorists are recruiting
AMERICANS to fight AGAINST America in the future in “lone-wolf
actions” to create havoc, right here in America. And I'd bet THEY
will have illegally-obtained guns, too. Meanwhile, the government
works HARD to DISARM all responsible, honest Americans so they will
not be able to defend themselves. (Cowboy Byte)
Thursday, March 12, 2015
A Bad Idea From the Start
A man
carried a rifle openly PAST a school where guns are prohibited. This
forced them to put the school on “”lock-down” and disrupted the
kids' education. The cops “politely” confronted him and he “not
so politely” cussed them out. Yes, he has a right to do this, but
“taunting” cops any time is not a good idea. They can ALWAYS find
SOMETHING to arrest you for. In this case, “disturbing the peace.”
If you're a pro-gun person, DON'T do anything like this. You'll set
the gun rights issue back. Responsible people in favor of being able
to have guns for self defense will NOT support you. If he had just
walked by the school and not “paraded” back and forth, taunting school officials into CALLING the law, there would have been no
problem. But he WANTED to force action on the part of the cops.
That's what liberals do. Not us. We try to observe the law and not
“taunt” the cops. (The Right to Bear)
"No Statistical Basis"
That's
what a Washington Post fact checker says about Obama's snarky crack
about the “fact” that “it is easier in some places to buy a gun
than to buy a book or a fresh vegetable.” I knew he was LYING as
soon as I heard him say it. I didn't need a statistical inference to
know it. That's what he DOES. When he wants something, he LIES to
support it. As he did many times when he wanted to pass Obamacare
into law. He told us we could keep our doctors and hospitals if we
liked them, well KNOWING it was a lie. He said his plan would LOWER
yearly insurance rates by $2500 when he KNEW it would DOUBLE them,
while we were FORCED to buy it. Whenever he opens his mouth, he LIES.
Listening to him talk is the best way to know what's true. Whatever
he says is a LIE, so “turn it around” and you have the truth. He
says his laws will stop gun violence, so we KNOW they will NOT. (The Blaze)
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Arizona to Ban Federal Gun Laws
Yes, it
can be done. By a simple law, passed by the legislature of ANY
state—IF they want to do so. The feds tell you federal law TRUMPS
state laws, which is a LIE. The Constitution clearly states that
just the opposite is true, the “Commerce Clause” notwithstanding.
That clause has been purposely misunderstood more often than the
Second amendment has been misunderstood, and for the same reason: to
pass unconstitutional laws and make the citizenry think they are
proper. But Arizona apparently realizes this, and are in the process
of making laws that TRUMP federal anti-gun laws. Let's just hope the
new governor is as astute as was the former one, who was seen giving
Obama a “piece of her mind” when he came to her state, thinking
to “bully” her into submission. (Western Journalism)
Latest Argument Is Stupid
The latest
argument against allowing college students to carry their guns onto
campus if they're legally allowed to carry them, anyway is STUPID.
They make note that there is a lot of drinking going on in college,
and they don't want drunken students anywhere near guns. That
completely ignores the fact that in the “general population”
there is a lot of drinking, too—which is evidenced by the rising
number of drunk driving convictions (that are on the rise even though
“authorities” don't get exited about MULTIPLE drunk driving
convictions until the drunk KILLS someone). And in places where gun
carrying is easier, gun deaths are NOT a “rising problem.” On the
contrary, where gun laws are the most permissive, gun violence goes
DOWN. That's a provable FACT, much purposely ignored by gun grabbers.
Yes, a lot of drinking goes on in college. But a lot of learning goes
on there, too. (Rare)
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
"Shades of Atlas Shrugged!"
In
Ayn Rand's “landmark” prophetic tome, “Atlas Shrugged,”
frustrated liberal politicians who wanted to continue to FEED off
profitable businesses for their own profit, actually made a LAW
against going out of business. Today, similarly frustrated thieving
politicians are frustrated by certain businesses moving out of “gun
unfriendly” states and into more “gun friendly” states. The
same thing is happening in Obama's “race war” (You know, the one
he is trying to start so he can make laws that hinder whites and make
life much easier for blacks, who now are unafraid to vent their own
racism). So race whore Jesse Jackson is now suggesting they make laws
against businesses moving without “permission” from bureaucrats
and politicians. That's the liberal solution to everything: make a
law allowing the government to be able to give “permission” to do
ANYTHING. (World
Net Daily)
Too Much Opposition
Sometimes it works, folks. ATF has “surrendered”
to the pressure and has announced it will not be banning AR-15 ammo
any time soon. It cites massive opposition, not the fact that this
would just be a “back-door getaround” the Constitution, since
guns are worthless without bullets. They still like the idea, but
they see the massive opposition, coupled with the difficulty in
enforcing the ban and ammo makers being well able to come up with
different ammo that will fit. Don't think this is the last you will
ever hear about this ban, however. The gun-grabbers are anything but
not determined in their fallacies. They're just postponing it until
later, when maybe the laws will be better and they can get it done.
(Bearing Arms)
Monday, March 9, 2015
"Easier to Buy A Gun Than A Book"
That's what Obama says. But that's
yet another of his BIG LIES. It's NOT easier to buy a gun than to buy
a book in this country unless you're a CRIMINAL, to begin with. I buy
books regularly. But I'd have to really go out of my way to buy a
gun. I'm not a criminal. That's the whole problem today. The
“anti-gun laws” they make “create a market” for ILLEGAL guns.
THAT'S what makes it easy to buy a gun—on the black market. That's
the whole point: “create a problem," then claim to want to “solve”
the problem YOU'VE created. That's the “modus operandi” of
politics if you're a Democrat. If there weren't laws making it
impossible for HONEST people to be able to be armed in self defense
(in spite of the Constitutional guarantee to keep us armed), the
black market in guns wouldn't be as strong as it is. (The Blaze)
Libs To Have Heart Attack
The
news media says, “If this law is passed, liberals are going to have
a heart attack.” and they're right. The specter of school children
going to school ARMED frightens them. But it won't happen, no matter
how hard they try and convince us it will. Whether schools are
“gun-free zones” or not, it is ILLEGAL for children to carry
loaded firearms. Anywhere. And that law works (along with parental control) as
well as any other. But this proposed law only allows TEACHERS and
other school staff to bring their guns with them to work IF they have
the "right to carry" otherwise, to make a potential shooter UNABLE to know if
there will be guns among them to OPPPOSE him when he comes in to kill
innocent people. This new law just recognizes that “gun-free zones”
don't work, and are only an INVITATION to would-be shooters to
victimize people in places where he KNOWS people will not (mostly) be
armed and able to stop him. (Right to Bear)
Sunday, March 8, 2015
Attacked From Behind
Got a gun? Can't adopt. The anti-gun fools can't seem to get all the
laws passed against guns they'd like.. So they improvise. Now they're
influencing decisions about adopting children, while releasing
“executive orders” to ban certain ammunition for the most popular
gun in the country, the AR-15. Everything they can accomplish
“administratively” to get around the law. And you can expect even
more sniveling, back-stabbing actions to make it harder on people
who own, or want to own guns, to live their lives in peace. Another
harassment effort involves pressuring banks to close the accounts of
gun makers and gun sellers to make it more difficult for them to do
ANY business. So now “gun people” can't buy AR-15 ammo, adopt
children, and likely can't get a bank account. What's next. There's
no telling with the underhanded fools doing these things. You know,
like Barack Hussein Obama. (Say Uncle)
Obama Lies (Again)
I know, I know: Obama lies so often it's not news
any more. But his latest lies are so blatant, and easily disproved,
it's FUNNY. He says, “Increased gun control measures would go a
long way toward cutting down on America’s homicide rate, President
Obama said during a town-hall event on Friday.” That lie depends
upon the assertion that CRIMINALS, who don't OBEY laws, will obey
one that says they can't be armed when they commit their crimes. I
don't think Obama is STUPID, no matter how hard he tries to convince
us he is through his ACTIONS, so that has GOT to be a lie. Just like
his other lie that says AR-15 ammo is dangerous because it can
penetrate a cop's bullet-proof vest, and has, is a flat-out LIE,
designed to falsely convince people he is right in BANNING that ammo.
The fact that NO cop has EVER been hurt by that ammo and even the
COPS say the ban is wrong and is NOT needed doesn't seem to bother him. He wants to do
it, so it WILL be done. That's the way it is with things Obama wants
to do. Obama is bound and determined to disarm Americans, and he will
tell ANY lie to get it done. (Bearing Arms)
Saturday, March 7, 2015
Where Guns Are Banned
Bad guys will kill with knives. Or clubs. Or meat
cleavers. Whatever they can find. Lack of guns has never stopped the
killing—anywhere; any time. People who want to kill will find
something to use in killing, even if they have to use their bare
hands. In communist China, where guns ARE banned, there have been TWO mass
“knife-killing” incidents in the last couple of years. At least
one of which was finally broken up by cops with—wait for it—guns,
who shot and killed one of the knife-wielders. This supports the
time-honored insistence that the way to stop “bad guys with guns”
is with “good guys with guns.” So why not ALLOW the “good guys”
to have their own guns? Certain politicians think ANYBODY who has a
gun will “go wild” and kill over a “fender bender” or
getting cut off in traffic (which already happens, with ILLEGAL
guns). (Fox News)
Safest Places In the Nation
In Alaska, Wyoming, Arkansas, and most of
Montana you don't need government permission to carry concealed. It
is recognized that it is your right to be armed in self defense
without a government license. It was that way everywhere a hundred
years ago (except in the East, where the anti-gun fools thrived). And
these are the safest places in the nation, with crime rates a lot
lower than in the rest of the nation. Are the two connected? Does
allowing honest people to carry concealed make crime rates go down,
as criminals either realize it's much more dangerous there for them
to “ply their trade,” or to find out WHY that is and die for it?
Now Colorado, with currently some of the tightest gun laws in the
nation, is considering going in the same direction. A “constitutional
carry law” has already passed the Senate there. It has two more
hurdles to go, and I hope it survives them. As a Colorado resident,
I look forward to being able to have and carry a gun, that the
Constitution says is my right to do. (The Right to Bear)
Friday, March 6, 2015
Spreading Lies and Discontent
Jennifer Mascia, also known as “Tommy Gnostis, is a Bloomberg
lie-spreader. She goes to pro-gun web sites and spreads lies and
discontent. Pretending to be pro-gun, she says things no REAL pro-gun
person would EVER say, all of it lies. One of the lies she spreads is
that gun rights are losing. But anybody who pays attention to the
real world knows we're WINNING. Obama can't get his anti-gun laws
passed in Congress, so now he's planning on trying the
“administrative” route. What that means is, he's going to put out
an ILLEGAL “Executive Order” to BAN AR-15 ammo, telling the LIE
that the ammo can penetrate the body armor cops wear, thus banning
the ammo is to “protect cops.” The truth is, NO cops have EVER
been hurt by an AR-15 bullet penetrating their body armor. His ban is
not to “protect cops,” it's to CONTROL the use of guns by legal
owners by making their ammo unavailable. (Captain's Journal)
"Just Pass A Law"
And
crime will stop. That's the sum total of the thinking of the anti-gun
fools who are constantly making useless gun laws that do nothing
except provide more unarmed victims for ILLEGALLY-armed criminals.
They think all they have to do is pass a law, and criminal activity
covered by that law will stop—immediately. That shows a degree of
naivete that knows no bounds. They have been proven wrong time and
time again, but that doesn't penetrate their thick skulls. They keep
on making their stupid laws and creating more and more honest victims
while criminals get their guns more easily in areas of tight gun laws
than elsewhere. Now they're going in a different direction. They're
now trying to ban AMMO, to make the guns (which they can't ban)
useless. That's not going to work, either. (KMJ Morning News)
Thursday, March 5, 2015
Telling "The Big Lie"
Obama
is (as usual) telling “the big lie” to support his proposed BAN
on AR-15 ammunition. He says cops have been KILLED by this ammo, and
he wants to get rid of it by BANNING it. Now you ask, how many cops
have gone victim to this “dangerous ammunition?” The answer is
easy to understand for intelligent people—NONE. Zip. Nada! He's basing his ban
on a LIE, as usual. That's what Obama does best—tell a LIE, and use
that lie to convince people who should know better, to support his
silly laws. Never mind that all a ban will do is keep HONEST people
from having that ammo while innovative ammo makers redesign the AR-15 to
use different ammo and criminals sell the original ammo on the Black
Market. Laws to stop Americans from having guns NEVER stops criminals
from getting their guns. To the contrary, the tighter anti-gun laws
are in any given area, the easier ILLEGAL guns are to get there, and
the more guns are available. It's a self-defeating exercise. (World Net Daily)
Gun-Grabber's Worst Nightmare
Illinois
passed a measure that “canceled out” Chicago's tough anti-gun
laws and allowed “concealed carry”—and gun violence PLUMMETED as a
result. NO longer can gun grabbers say, truthfully, that “concealed
carry” won't affect gun violence, and that the only way to defend
ourselves was to DISARM all Americans (except the criminals, of
course, who get their guns illegally). Of course, they don't care
about truth. The gun grabbers say whatever they think we will BELIEVE
in support of their insane gun bans and attempts to ban ammunition to
make our guns useless. Chicago, although it had some of the tightest
anti-gun laws in the nation, also had the worst gun violence figures
in the nation. Something we pointed out, many times, which did
NOTHING to keep Chicago from making more useless and stupid gun
laws—until now. I predict that the stupid politicians in Chicago
will try their best to get around the Illinois law that PERMITS
“concealed carry,” in SPITE of it's DEMONSTRABLE effect on gun
violence (or perhaps BECAUSE of it). (Ben Swan)
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
More Than the Cops
Tulsa
(Oklahoma) citizens are shooting more criminals than the cops,
according to this study. Tulsa has had 11 homicides in the past year
and HALF of them have been done by citizens defending themselves
lawfully against criminals. In 2014, EIGHT of them were done by
citizens defending themselves while only SIX were done by the cops.
NONE of them this year have been done by the cops. In Oklahoma, you
don't have to “fear for your life” in order to use “deadly
force.” You only have to fear the “bad guys” will “hurt you
or a member of your family. (Daily Caller)
"Going After" Gun Sellers
Obama's “Operation Choke Point” seeks to make it hard to do
business for gun dealers, and any other businesses Obama doesn't like
by doing such things as denying them as much banking privileges as he
can, as well as other things. “Operation Choke Point” is a program
by which the Department of Justice works with other administration
agencies, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to
force banks to shut down accounts of businesses that it objects to (ones that are perfectly legal otherwise).
The program purports to fight fraudulent businesses, but has instead
targeted many gun and ammunition dealers and other lawful
businesses.” And they're doing this by FIAT, not as a result of a
law being passed. One of their tactics is IRS audits four times a
year for selected companies. Talk about the IRS “targeting”
scandal! This “triples down” on that, even while it is being
“investigated.” That shows graphically how much that
“investigation” frightens them. There's no law to back this up,
just intimidation of bankers. (Patrick Howley)
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
They Never Learn
We lost many of the anti-gun fools in the Congress
in the last election, but those who remain are “alive and well”
and as stupid as ever. Limiting the size of gun magazines never
works, but they are determined to keep on coming at us with this
stupid law. That's just one of the stupid laws they wan to make. All
work to DISARM Americans while criminals go right on getting their
guns ILLEGALLY. They just won't get it that criminals don't OBEY
laws. ANY laws, much less ones that say they can't be armed. They
never have, and they never will. But these fools keep insisting on
trying to make more laws for them to ignore, rather than come up with
some that will WORK. And we keep “beating them back” with LOGIC,
until they come out and deny the EXISTENCE of logic so they won't
have to fight it, any more. (Daily Caller)
"Militia Clause" Misunderstood
Purposely misunderstood, that is. It
isn't hard to understand that there was NO SUCH THING as an
“organized militia” at the time the Second Amendment was written,
so they couldn't have meant that. The only other thing they COULD
have meant is that the entire population is considered to be a
“militia,” ready, able, and armed to respond in the government's
need. This is why they made such a big thing out of the entire
population remaining armed, so they could be “called up” if the
need arose and would have their own guns. But the “anti-gun fools” are so bent on DISARMING the
honest people of this nation that they purposely misunderstood it so
they could CLAIM that people who were not members of an ORGANIZED
militia did not need to be armed. This argument has gone on since
before the ink dried on the Constitution, and will probably go on
long after most of us are dead. Those “Gun-grabbers” are nothing
if not determined to disarm Americans. (Daily Record)
Monday, March 2, 2015
Who "Vets" Commentators on Fox?
That's what they're asking since one of them, Regis Giles, commented
about Obama's ridiculous claim that AR-15 ammo could penetrate bullet-proof
vests, his false claim as the reason why he wants to BAN those
bullets, except in cop's and government agent's guns. The fact is,
that there has NEVER been a case of a cop being murdered by such a
bullet. It's all in Obama's “gun-hating” mind. He just wants to
make it tougher on gun owners. As to “vetting” Fox people, they
don't. They hire good people and “turn them loose.” They mostly
tell the truth, but remember, they have as many LIBERALS on staff as
conservatives. And you can't get liberals to tell the truth, wherever
they are. (Patriot Post)
"Feeling the Pinch"
Obama is “feeling the pinch.” He has only two years left before
he will need to spend ALL his time trying to figure out a believable
reason to “delay” the elections for as long as possible (and
don't think that's not at the front of his mind). He needs to get as
much skulduggery done as possible. He just finished violating the
Constitution and ignoring a court order to continue his “work”
on amnesty, and now he is about to issue yet another “executive
action (probably not an executive order) to BAN AR-l5 ammunition. He
knows that ammunition is the most popular in the nation, because the
AR-15 is the most popular of guns. He says it's because this ammunition
is capable of piercing the bullet-proof vests worn by the cops. So
instead of improving those vests, he BANS the ammo, and BELIEVES
people will not be able to obtain it, since it will be illegal. Of
course, that has never stopped criminals and crazies from getting
their guns (and ammo) in the past, and it won't in the future.. And
he forgets how innovative Americans are, and can redesign the AR-15
to use different ammo. (KMTV)
Sunday, March 1, 2015
Bad Day Yesterday
When you get to my age (77), you have good days and
bad days. Yesterday was a bad day for me. I felt lousy, but that;s
normal, for me. But what made it a bad day is that old eye problem
that overcame me some time ago came back. I couldn't even OPEN my
right eye, and it hurt like hades. I took a pain pill my doc gave
(gave? ) me and it helped the pain—unless I opened my eye.
Fortunately, I still had some of the eye drops the eye doctor gave me
then, which “fixed it” then, and it seems to have fixed it,
again. So, back to “business as usual.”
Mall of Americas Surrenders
That's what they've done with their new
“no guns on the premises” policy. Do they REALLY think that will
stop the Islamic terrorists when they “come calling?” Have they
ever known Islamic terrorists to OBEY the law, or especially a
“policy” of one of their targets? What kind of STUPID does it
take to think the way to self-defense is to DISARM yourself? Most
anti-gun fools think that. Which is why they consistently make and
support their USELESS laws to keep guns out of the hands of
responsible citizens while crooks, criminals, and that special kind
of criminal, a gang member, never has any trouble getting his ILLEGAL
guns? One of these days these FOOLS will figure it out, but It won't
happen in my lifetime. Mall of the Americas probably plans on having
uniformed, armed guards to rely on. That ought to give the terrorists
some good target practice in preparation for shooting up their mall
since they're so easy to identify and kill first. (Daily Caller)
Arrested for Using HIs Rights
The feds tried to claim that Anthony
Bosworth was on federal property when he stood OUTSIDE a government
building attending a “states rights” rally with a rifle on his
shoulder, which was entirely legal in Washington State. But the feds were
determined to arrest him for SOMETHING. So they arbitrarily extended
the property limits of a federal building to include the sidewalk in
front of it so they could arrest him for carrying a gun on federal
property. Fortunately, someone higher up was a little smarter than
the ones on the scene and released him without charges, thus not
subjecting him to time in jail and having to spend a lot of money of
lawyers. But he was still subjected to the indignity of being arrested, handcuffed, and "perp-walked" to their car in front of all his friends. (Last Resistance)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)